get_payee_locations_by_payee

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the exclude_fields behavior but does not disclose that this is a read-only operation, any required permissions, or potential side effects. Missing information about the return structure or pagination, though output schema covers return format. Overall, limited behavioral disclosure.

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 efficient: a one-line purpose followed by structured Args section. Every sentence adds value. The bullet-style parameter descriptions are clear and concise. Slightly redundant with tool name, but still well-organized and easy to parse.

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 no annotations and an output schema (exists but not shown), the description covers the exclude_fields parameter well but does not explain the return value beyond what schema provides. It lacks context about alternative tools or filtering options. For a tool with 3 parameters and moderate complexity, it is minimally complete but has gaps in usage context.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds value by explaining exclude_fields in detail (default behavior, passing empty list, custom list). It also hints at plan_id with 'use list_plans to find available IDs'. However, payee_id has no added semantics. The explanation is helpful but not comprehensive.

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 'Get all locations for a specific payee' - a specific verb (get) and resource (locations for a payee). The tool name includes 'by_payee' and the description reinforces this scope. Among siblings, it is distinct from 'list_payee_locations' (likely all locations) and 'get_payee_location' (single location).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'list_payee_locations' or 'get_payee_location'. It mentions using 'list_plans' to find plan IDs but does not set expectations for when this tool is appropriate or offer exclusions. The agent is left to infer use cases.

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