detect_locations

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the detection basis (contiguous UTC-offset runs) and output categories (homes and trips), but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, non-mutation, or data-access constraints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short, front-loaded, and contains no filler. The first sentence describes the output and the second gives usage, though the phrasing is somewhat dense.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The output schema exists, so return-value details need not be in the description. However, the description leaves min_days unexplained and, without annotations, does not cover behavioral constraints or alternatives sufficiently for a fully self-contained definition.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter, min_days, has 0% schema description coverage and is not mentioned in the description. Its name is fairly intuitive, but the definition does not explain how the threshold affects detected runs or the default of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a concrete output: a timeline of contiguous UTC-offset runs split into homes and trips. It is specific enough to understand the resource, but it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools such as trips or set_periods.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The sentence 'Use it to suggest periods (e.g. a move)' gives a clear use case for the tool. It does not state when not to use it, prerequisites, or alternatives, so it falls short of full routing guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.