Search Zillow for-sale or rental listings by city, ZIP, or neighborhood. Returns price, beds, baths, sqft, address, coordinates, and listing URL. No API key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| minBeds | No | Minimum bedrooms | |
| location | Yes | City, ZIP, or neighborhood (e.g. "Austin, TX", "78701") | |
| maxItems | No | Max properties (default 50) | |
| maxPrice | No | Maximum price | |
| minPrice | No | Minimum price | |
| daysOnZillow | No | Only listings posted within this many days |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states 'No API key' but lacks details on rate limits, data freshness, caching, or restrictions (e.g., geographies covered). The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated, and no error behavior is described.
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?
Description is concise, with three sentences each adding information: first sentence defines purpose, second lists returned fields, third notes no API key. No unnecessary words.
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 search tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a list of returned fields which partially compensates for missing output schema. However, it lacks details on sorting, pagination (maxItems is described in schema), and whether both for-sale and rental are searched simultaneously or need separate calls.
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 parameters. The description adds marginal value by listing return fields (price, beds, baths, sqft, address, coordinates, URL) but does not enhance parameter meaning 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?
Description clearly states the verb 'Search', resource 'Zillow for-sale or rental listings', and acceptable location inputs. It distinguishes from sibling real estate tools like search_realtor and search_redfin by specifically mentioning Zillow.
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?
Description implies use for searching Zillow listings and mentions 'No API key' as an advantage, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings like search_realtor or search_redfin, nor does it mention any limitations or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target unique data sources or specific actions (e.g., search_zillow vs. get_zillow_property_details are clearly sequential). A few LinkedIn-related tools (find_linkedin_candidates vs. search_linkedin_employees) have overlapping purposes but their descriptions clarify distinct use cases. Overall, confusion is minimal and descriptions resolve ambiguity.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, using verbs like search, get, find, scrape, analyze, lookup, resolve, and verify. The pattern is predictable across the entire set, making it easy for an agent to infer function from name.
With 32 tools, the server exceeds the 'too many' threshold of 25+. While the broad scope of web data mining justifies some diversity, the count is unwieldy and could overwhelm an agent's selection process. A smaller, more focused set per domain would improve coherence.
The toolset covers a wide range of data retrieval needs: company research, real estate, job listings, academic research, and government records. For a read-only data aggregation service, there are no major lifecycle gaps, though some subdomains like social media scraping only cover Reddit and LinkedIn, missing other platforms. Overall, it is reasonably complete for its stated purpose.
