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

With no annotations, the description still adds real behavioral context: no API key is required and sensitive fields (keys, personal contacts) are never returned. It does not cover behavior on an invalid/unknown listing_id or describe the shape of the returned 'full public details'.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and parameter, with a compact parenthetical for the auth and privacy caveats. Nothing is wasted.

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 simple one-parameter read with no output schema, the auth and privacy disclosure is the key addition and it is present. However, 'full public details' is left undefined, so an agent cannot anticipate what fields come back.

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 100% and the single listing_id is already documented with its provenance. The description only restates 'by listing_id' and adds no format, validation, or sourcing detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: fetch the full public details of a single listing, keyed by listing_id. The scope ('one listing') implicitly separates it from the plural search_pros, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 is only implied: the listing_id comes from register_business or search_pros (per the schema), so this is the follow-up detail fetch. The description itself offers no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative routing.

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