lookup_component_location_tool

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions deprecation and alias status, without describing any specific behavior, side effects, or return value. This leaves the agent uninformed about the tool's actual operation.

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 short sentence that directly conveys the deprecation and alias relationship, with no unnecessary words.

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?

The description provides the essential fact that this is a deprecated alias, but it omits any information about parameters, output, or behavior, making it insufficient for a new agent to understand the tool's full context. However, since it directs to the canonical tool, it partially compensates.

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 description does not mention any of the four parameters (component_name, project_id, excel_path, import_version_id), so the agent has no semantic guidance beyond the schema's default values.

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 identifies the tool as a deprecated alias for lookup_component_location, which gives a specific purpose (to redirect to the canonical tool) but does not state the underlying functionality. This is clear enough to distinguish it from siblings but lacks a direct verb.

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 states it is deprecated and an alias for lookup_component_location, telling the agent to use that tool instead. This is strong guidance on when not to use this tool.

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