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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real value by disclosing the publication constraint and that license records (Florida DBPR so far) are embedded in the result, but it says nothing about what happens when the id is unknown or the listing is unpublished.

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 front-loaded sentence with no padding; the scope, key type, and return content all appear up front. The parenthetical 'Florida DBPR so far' is substantive rather than noise.

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 one-parameter read tool this covers purpose and partial payload, but with no output schema the description should say more about what the record contains and about not-found/unpublished behavior. Adequate rather than complete.

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% and the single parameter is undocumented in the schema, so the description carries the burden. 'By id or slug' tells the agent both identifier forms are accepted, which is meaningfully more than the opaque 'id_or_slug' string field 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?

Names a specific verb+resource (fetch one published listing) and states the lookup key ('by id or slug'), which clearly separates it from search_listings. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with the sibling tools, so it isn't a 5.

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: 'published listing' hints that unpublished records aren't retrievable, and 'by id or slug' signals this is the direct-lookup path rather than a search. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-to-prefer-search_listings guidance and no stated prerequisites.

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