Obtener localización

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the useful behavioral detail that the result includes resident IDs, but it does not discuss missing IDs, errors, or response shape, which is acceptable given the annotations and output schema.

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 compact sentence with no filler. Every word contributes: it names the action, the object, the lookup key, and the returned relationship.

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 getter with one required parameter, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description provides sufficient context: what to pass and what to expect. No critical operational details are missing.

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 no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), and the description only says 'por su id,' which roughly maps to location_id without adding constraints, format, examples, or edge-case semantics. The single parameter is self-describing by name, so the minimal mapping is adequate but not rich.

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 starts with 'Devuelve una localización por su id' (Returns a location by its id), stating a specific verb and resource and clearly distinguishing this from list_locations. It also specifies the unique payload detail, 'con los ids de sus residentes,' which further identifies the tool's purpose.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving a single location by ID, and the sibling list_locations makes the alternative obvious. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer this tool over list_locations or when not to use it, leaving the routing to inference.

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