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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it returns listing URLs, excludes contact details, and instructs the agent to send the person to the URL. This helps set expectations about the tool's output and limitations.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and scope first, then adds the essential caveat about contact details. There is no filler or redundant information.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately explains the key return behavior: listing URLs and no contact details. It could be more complete by addressing pagination behavior for page/page_size, but the core search-and-redirect workflow is well covered.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does clarify the main filter parameters by naming city, district, type, bedrooms, and price, but it omits page and page_size and provides no value formats or allowed values. The compensation is partial.

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 ('Search'), a clear resource ('long-term rental listings in Da Nang'), and the filtering dimensions (city, district, type, bedrooms, price). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_listing, find_buildings, and market_stats.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. An agent must infer that get_listing is for individual listing details and find_buildings is for buildings rather than rentals.

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