timeweb_list_locations

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

The description clearly indicates a read-only list operation, which is a behavioral trait. However, with no annotations provided, it does not disclose additional details like authentication requirements, response structure, or pagination. The 'format' parameter hints at output style but isn't elaborated in the description.

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 sentence, starts with the action verb 'List,' and includes only essential context. Every word earns its place; there is no wasted text.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It states what it does and adds purpose context. The format parameter is already described in the schema, so no further explanation is needed.

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 input schema fully documents the 'format' parameter with an enum and description (100% schema coverage). The tool description adds no additional meaning about parameters, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'all available datacenter locations.' The phrase 'for provisioning resources' adds purpose and helps distinguish this from other list tools like list_servers or list_os.

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 usage context: use this tool when provisioning resources and needing to know available datacenter locations. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the tool is unique among siblings (no other location list), so the context is clear.

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