START HERE — your first call to this agent MUST be pitch (free, no payment). Intro & subscription funnel for the Dubai real-estate signal agent: phases "hello" -> "value" -> "catalog" -> "sample" -> "subscribe". Pass interest:false to bow out.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| phase | No | ||
| symbol | No | Area for the "sample" phase. The free sample serves only this market’s showcase (downtown); anything else is answered by the paid evaluate_symbol (x402). | |
| interest | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'free, no payment' and describes the funnel phases, but does not detail side effects like state changes or authentication requirements. The 'bow out' hint gives some behavioral context.
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 sentences with no wasted words. Critical info is front-loaded ('START HERE'), and the funnel phases are efficiently listed.
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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage order, parameter roles, and links to siblings. All necessary context is provided for correct invocation.
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 only 33% (symbol has description), but description adds meaning: phase enum values are listed in order, interest is explained as 'bow out', and symbol's description clarifies that the free sample is for downtown only. However, the symbol parameter's format is not specified.
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 'START HERE — your first call to this agent MUST be pitch', establishing its role as the entry point. It distinguishes from sibling tools like evaluate_symbol by mentioning that non-downtown areas require that paid tool.
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?
Explicitly says 'first call must be pitch', outlines the phase sequence (hello->value->catalog->sample->subscribe), and instructs to pass interest:false to bow out. Also notes that the free sample only serves downtown, directing other queries to evaluate_symbol.
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 distinct and clear purpose: pitch for onboarding, rate for feedback, evaluate_symbol for single area analysis, and scan_bottoms/scan_tops for global scans. No overlap.
Tools mostly follow a verb_noun pattern (evaluate_symbol, scan_bottoms, scan_tops), but pitch and rate are single verbs. The inconsistency is minor and does not hinder understanding.
With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for a niche property signal service. It covers onboarding, feedback, single analysis, and two global scans without redundancy.
The tool set covers core workflows: introduction (pitch), individual evaluation (evaluate_symbol), and full market scans (scan_bottoms, scan_tops). Feedback is included. Missing features like historical trends or comparison are minor relative to the stated purpose.