Get session locations

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, pagination, or data format. The aggregation behavior is stated, but no edge cases or constraints are disclosed.

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 clear sentence that wastes no words. It front-loads the primary purpose. However, it could be considered slightly under-specified given the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema and 9 parameters, the description should explain the return format (e.g., structure of geographic data) and possible limitations. It only vaguely mentions 'aggregated counts' without describing the actual response shape or error conditions.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the description adds little extra beyond clarifying the output context. The description does not deepen understanding of parameter interactions, such as the relationship between date ranges and relative time parameters.

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 retrieves aggregated session counts by geographic coordinates (lat/lon, city, country) for a site, with the specific use case of plotting on a map. This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like rybbit_get_overview or rybbit_get_breakdown.

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 hints at usage for map plotting but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it give any 'when not to use' advice or mention sibling tools by name for comparison.

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