Get Payee Location

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the ID must come from list_payee_locations, but it does not cover error handling, authentication, or default budget behavior. This is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant clauses. It states the purpose, the read-only nature, and the required ID source efficiently.

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 simple read-only fetch, the annotations, input schema, and output schema cover the essential safety, parameter, and return-value information. The only notable gap is not explicitly distinguishing this from get_payee_locations_by_payee when the caller has a payee ID instead of a payee-location ID.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents budgetId and payeeLocationId. The description only adds provenance for payeeLocationId by pointing to list_payee_locations, a minor bonus over 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 names a specific verb ('Get'), a singular resource ('one payee location record'), and a clear lookup mechanism ('by its ID'). It also lists the key returned fields (payee, latitude, longitude), which distinguishes it from list_payee_locations and get_payee_locations_by_payee.

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 gives a clear precondition: the caller needs a payee-location ID from list_payee_locations. It does not explicitly mention sibling alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it stops 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.