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

With no behavioral annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses that the user's contact is shared with a third-party realtor, that a fallback team may handle the request, and that realtor services may be paid. It does not cover whether the request can be cancelled or what response the caller receives.

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?

Three efficient sentences: purpose first, consent prerequisite second, cost/terms caveat third. Every sentence earns its place and there is no wasted text.

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 10-parameter side-effect tool with no output schema and no behavioral annotations, the description covers the critical privacy, consent, third-party, and cost context. It leaves return behavior and cancellation unspecified, but the schema handles parameter completeness.

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 the schema already documents all 10 parameters in detail. The description reinforces the contact and consent semantics but adds little parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 action: sending the user's request to a local partner realtor or the Domly team, with the outcome that the realtor contacts the user and picks rental options. This is clearly distinct from the read/search/list siblings and leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

It gives a clear prerequisite: call only after the user explicitly agrees to share their contact for this purpose. It also explains the realtor may charge for their own services, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use this tool beyond the consent condition.

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