ghl_calendar_service_location_create

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

Annotations indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint false) but not destructive (destructiveHint false). The description adds the endpoint URL and OAuth scopes, which are useful. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent (idempotentHint false) or what happens if a location with the same slug already exists. The behavioral information is adequate but not thorough.

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 short and includes essential information: title, action, endpoint, and scopes. It is well-structured and easy to scan. A slightly more structured format (e.g., bullet points) could improve readability, but it is already concise.

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 tool has no output schema, and the description does not explain what the response will contain (e.g., the created service location object). For a create operation, this is a significant gap. The description also omits any error conditions or success indicators. Overall, it is not complete enough for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 provides detailed descriptions, examples, and structure for all parameters, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already offers, so it does not compensate further. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool creates a service location. The verb 'Create' and noun 'Service Location' are specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like ghl_calendar_service_location_update or ghl_calendar_service_location_delete, leaving ambiguity about when to use this tool over alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, success criteria, or scenarios where this tool should be preferred over ghl_calendar_service_location_update or other calendar service location tools.

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