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

Annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-obvious context: the data source (Dubai Land Department open data), its daily refresh cadence, the CC BY 4.0 license, and an instruction to link the returned `url` when citing.

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 content is front-loaded (what the report contains) followed by parameter and provenance notes, in three tight lines with no filler. Every sentence contributes information the agent needs.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields, and it covers the single input parameter, data provenance, freshness, and licensing. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and cite the result.

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%, so the description carries the full burden for the single `month` parameter, and it does so: it gives the expected format ('YYYY-MM') and states that omitting it returns the latest report, which matches the null default in the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get the monthly Dubai property market report') and enumerates the report contents (sales, median price, AED/sqft, YoY, top movers, citation string), so an agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling get_market_summary, so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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 by the tool name and the 'omit for the latest report' note, which tells the agent the default case. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of when a sibling such as get_market_summary or list_rankings would be the better choice.

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