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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, destructive=false, idempotent=true, and openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: licensed-state restriction, capcenter.com-only listings, MLS attribution requirements, quote and agent links, and Spanish response behavior.

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 definition is front-loaded with the core purpose and filters, followed by return details and language behavior. Every sentence contributes practical information, with no filler or repetition.

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 11 parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough to invoke correctly: it explains the search scope, available filters, returned listing facts, links, MLS attribution, and Spanish behavior. The schema already handles parameter-level constraints and required fields.

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 all 11 parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description usefully restates the main filter categories and the 10-listing cap, but it does not add syntax or default details beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: searching homes for sale on capcenter.com with location and property filters. It also clarifies the geographic scope (licensed states only) and the filter dimensions, so an agent can distinguish this from mortgage, rate, and valuation sibling tools without opening the schema.

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 context is clear: search listings in a city, county, or ZIP within a CapCenter-licensed state, filtered by price, beds, baths, and property type. It does not name exclusions or alternatives, but none of the sibling tools overlap with this home-search operation.

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