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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds behavioral context by listing exactly what fields are returned (asking price, address, bedrooms, etc.) and the nature of the query, going beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 concise two-sentence structure that front-loads the action ('Query Redfin real estate listings') and follows with return fields and use cases. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool has 4 well-documented parameters, no output schema, and annotations indicating read-only open-world behavior. The description covers the return fields and use cases, which is sufficient for a search tool. It does not mention pagination or sorting, but these are not critical given the context, so a small gap prevents a 5.

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%, with all four parameters documented with descriptions and examples. The description's phrase 'by location and filters' adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool queries Redfin real estate listings by location and filters, with a specific verb and resource. It also lists returned fields, distinguishing it from the sibling get_property_details, which is about individual property details rather than search results.

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 provides explicit use cases ('Use for home shopping, market analysis, investment research, or neighborhood comparison'), giving clear context on when to use the tool. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it lacks the explicit exclusion or alternative naming that would warrant a 5.

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