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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the type of data returned (amenities, pricing breakdown, contact info, images), which is useful. However, it does not mention potential error behavior, authentication requirements, or the read-only nature explicitly, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no filler or redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the essential return value details. It does not explain locale usage or error handling, but for a straightforward detail-fetching tool, it is sufficiently complete. Lacking annotations, it could be more thorough, but it meets the needs of most use cases.

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 coverage is 50% (only listing_id has a description). The tool description adds 'by ID', reinforcing the meaning of listing_id, but it does not explain the 'locale' parameter at all. The description provides some additional context beyond the schema but does not fully compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 a specific action ('Get full details') and a specific resource ('a specific property by ID'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_popular_listings' and 'get_similar_listings' by emphasizing the ID-based lookup, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage: use this when you have a specific property ID and need full details. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like 'get_similar_listings' or 'search_listings', nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the ID.

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