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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It does not mention that this is a read-only operation, any side effects, data freshness, or permissions required. The agent cannot infer safety or cost implications.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the action and lists key contents. Efficient, though could be slightly more structured with bullet points or explicit parameter mention.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and output components. However, it lacks detail on output format, response structure, and parameter constraints, leaving some ambiguity.

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 0%, but the description does not add meaning to the state parameter beyond what the schema shows. It omits format (e.g., two-letter code), allowed values, or behavior when omitted. The default 'CT' is noted in schema but not explained.

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 it gets a market summary for a state and lists included data points (active listings, avg cap rate, top submarkets, recent velocity). This is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_market_benchmarks, though not explicitly differentiated.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it could contrast with get_market_benchmarks or indicate use cases like 'for high-level overview'.

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