Read the full Markdown text of a specific Immoswipe guide/blog article by slug (get the slug from search_guides).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Article slug, e.g. "expat-guide-switzerland". Numeric ID also works. | |
| locale | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'Read' and specifies the return format ('Markdown text'), but it doesn't mention locale behavior, error handling, or any side effects. It's adequate but not rich.
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 with no wasted words, front-loaded with the action and resource. It's concise and well-structured.
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 read tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient: it tells how to get the input and what to expect as output. However, it omits any mention of the optional locale parameter, which could be considered a minor gap.
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 description adds context to the slug parameter ('by slug', 'get the slug from search_guides'), reinforcing its purpose. However, the locale parameter is not mentioned at all, and since schema coverage is only 50%, the description only partially compensates for the gap.
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 reads a specific guide/article by slug, with a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('Markdown text of a specific Immoswipe guide/blog article'). It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly referencing search_guides for obtaining the slug.
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 instructs to get the slug from search_guides, which implies a workflow: use search_guides first, then get_guide. This is clear context for when to use the tool, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool serves a clearly distinct function: searching listings, retrieving property details, finding similar/popular listings, checking availability, assessing rental chances, joining the tenant pool, and accessing FAQs/guides. No two tools overlap in purpose, and the workflow between check_rental_chances and join_tenant_pool is explicitly documented.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in lowercase snake_case. Most retrieval operations use the 'get_' prefix (get_faqs, get_guide, get_listing_detail), while search_guides and search_listings use 'search_', and the two non-retrieval operations use 'check_' and 'join_'. This consistency makes the API predictable and easy to navigate.
With 10 tools, the server falls squarely in the well-scoped range (3-15). The tools cover discovery (search, popular, similar, detail), specialized assessment (rental chances), booking availability, tenant pool registration, and content retrieval (FAQs, guides) without unnecessary duplication or bloat.
The tool set comprehensively covers the tenant-facing workflow: searching properties, viewing details, checking availability, assessing rental chances, and optionally joining the tenant pool. Minor gaps exist in property management operations (e.g., no create/update/delete for listings) but these are out of scope for the platform's apparent consumer focus.
