search_locations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that each result includes address fields and phone number and clarifies the entity type, which is useful. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, sorting defaults, or that no filters return all locations, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. It opens with the action and resource, states output characteristics, and then provides a usage directive, all in a compact and logical structure.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description partially explains return contents (address fields and phone number) and gives entity-type context. It does not describe the overall response shape or pagination metadata, but the schema's page_size and page_number parameters make pagination inferable, so the description is largely sufficient.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all nine parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool searches for physical addresses/sites of an organization, with the specific verb 'Search' and resource 'locations'. It also distinguishes locations from flexible assets, making its purpose distinct from sibling search_flexible_assets.

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 description explicitly tells the agent to use this tool rather than search_flexible_assets when looking up an organization's address or phone, providing a clear routing rule. It also explains that locations are a built-in entity, giving context for when this tool is appropriate.

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