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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true), and the description adds real context: per-call confirmation is on by default and can be disabled, the action reaches other people (live listing), and it requires a Cotlet API key with app access. These go beyond the structured hints meaningfully.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, but the 'as the floor plan icon does in Profolio' idea is repeated across two consecutive sentences, adding redundancy. The behavioral notes at the end are useful but make the description longer than needed.

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 two-parameter mutation with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action, confirmation behavior, auth requirement, and the live-listing side effect. Nothing critical for invoking it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented (listing_id from list_listings, floor_plan_id from uploads). The description restates the uploads origin but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: linking/assigning a floor plan to one listing, mapped to the Profolio 'floor plan icon' step. An agent can tell this is the assignment action rather than a listing reader, though it never names a sibling to distinguish from.

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 implied through the Profolio workflow description and the note that Bayut requires a floor plan for a perfect quality score, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not or alternative tool named. Adequate context, no routing guidance.

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