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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and scope are covered. The description adds real value with the CRM provenance and the 5-minute refresh cadence, but says nothing about result ordering, ranking, or what happens when the limit truncates matches.

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?

Two tight sentences with the resource and freshness stated first, then the filter surface. Minor waste in enumerating filters that the schema already enumerates, but nothing is padded.

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?

With 7 optional parameters and no output schema, the description should say what a result looks like or how results are ordered/truncated, and it does not. The freshness note partially compensates, but an agent still cannot predict the return shape.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented, including units ('AED') and ranges (1-50). The description only restates the filter dimensions ('text, location, type, price and bedrooms') without adding syntax, matching behavior, or interaction rules, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Search ... live sale listings') and names the backing data source (MRK CRM), which an agent can distinguish from search_projects and get_listing by the word 'search' plus 'listings'. It does not explicitly contrast itself with those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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 only implied: 'search live listings' suggests a discovery step before get_listing, but the description never says when to prefer this over search_projects or get_listing. There are no exclusions and no prerequisites stated.

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