zia_get_location

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint: true, and the description aligns with a read operation. The description adds 'full configuration', hinting at response richness, but lacks details on response format, error handling, or specific fields. No contradiction with annotations.

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 one concise sentence that immediately states the action and target. No redundant information, front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 get-by-ID operation, the description is adequate. It mentions 'full configuration' to set expectations about the response, but could elaborate on what that includes, especially given no output schema. However, for a straightforward single-resource fetch, this is sufficient.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the single parameter 'location_id' is self-explanatory. The description redundantly mentions 'by ID' but does not add format, constraints, or additional semantics beyond what the schema's property name already conveys.

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 a single ZIA location by ID', specifying the verb, resource, and scope. This distinguishes it from list tools like zia_list_locations and other get_* tools for different resources.

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?

Usage is implied: this tool retrieves a single location by ID. No explicit mention of when to use versus alternatives or when not to use. The context from sibling tools (e.g., zia_list_locations) provides implicit differentiation, but no direct guidance is given.

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