search_agentsSearch REGISTERED real-estate agents and professionals on Tu Lugar by name, city, or company. Only covers people who created a public profile on the platform — there is no data about anyone else.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | No | Agent name (or part of it) | |
| city | No | ||
| limit | No | Max 20 | |
| verified | No | Only verified agents | |
| company_id | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds value by specifying that the tool only returns data for agents with public profiles, which is a key behavioral constraint beyond what annotations provide.
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?
Two sentences, no fluff. The first sentence states the purpose and searchable fields; the second clarifies the limitation. Every word is necessary and well-placed.
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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core function and an important limitation (only registered agents). It could be improved by mentioning pagination or result format, but it is sufficient given the annotations and schema.
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 60% (q and limit have descriptions). The description adds context by grouping parameters (q, city, company_id) as search filters, clarifying their role. However, city and company_id lack individual descriptions in both the schema and the description.
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 specifies the verb 'Search' and the resource 'REGISTERED real-estate agents and professionals on Tu Lugar'. It lists search dimensions (name, city, company) and distinguishes from siblings by noting it only covers public profiles on this platform.
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 implies usage scope by stating 'Only covers people who created a public profile on the platform'. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_agent or search_companies, nor does it provide 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 have clearly distinct purposes, but there is some overlap between 'search' and 'search_listings', and between 'fetch' and 'get_listing'. However, descriptions effectively differentiate them.
Naming follows multiple patterns: verb_noun (create_listing), noun (closing_costs), get_*, search_*, my_*. While each pattern is internally consistent, the mix reduces overall consistency.
39 tools is relatively high, but they cover a broad set of real estate functionalities. The count feels slightly heavy but is justified by the domain scope.
The tool set covers the full lifecycle of listings (CRUD, promotion, sharing), account management, search with multiple filters, market data, guides, and lead management. No obvious gaps for the platform's purpose.