get_location

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. 'Get' plus 'including its full address and phone number' indicates a read operation with no side effects, but auth needs, missing-ID behavior, and full response details are not disclosed. This is adequate for a simple GET but not comprehensive.

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 a single sentence with no filler, opening with the action and target. It adds useful result detail without excessive verbosity.

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?

For a one-parameter GET with no output schema, the description effectively conveys the scope and primary returned fields. It could mention error/not-found behavior or authentication requirements, but the low complexity makes the current description largely complete.

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 input schema already describes id as 'The location ID' with 100% coverage. The description adds only that the ID identifies a specific IT Glue location, providing no additional format or semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 'Get a specific location by ID from IT Glue', naming the verb, resource, and retrieval mode. This clearly distinguishes it from search_locations, which searches rather than fetches a known ID, and mentions key returned data (address and phone number).

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 phrase 'specific location by ID' implies this tool is appropriate when the caller already has a location ID. However, it does not explicitly contrast with search_locations or state when to prefer an alternative, so usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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