Get Payee Location

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds only the returned fields and the ID provenance — no pagination, error, or scope notes beyond that.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource and its key fields front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 two-parameter, single-resource getter with full annotations and an output schema, this is nearly sufficient. The only real gap is the undocumented budgetId, which the description does not cover.

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 50%: payeeLocationId is documented identically in the schema and the description, while budgetId is unexplained in both. The description adds no semantics (format, scope, whether budgetId is required context) that the schema doesn't already state.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource (payee location) plus the fields returned (payee, latitude, longitude), which is more than a restated name. The reference to a location ID from list_payee_locations implicitly distinguishes it from the list/by-payee siblings, though it never names them.

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?

It tells the agent where the required ID comes from (list_payee_locations), which is a useful prerequisite. However it gives no explicit guidance on when to pick this over get_payee_locations_by_payee or get_payee — the choice is left to inference from the parameter name.

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