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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a real behavioral fact beyond the schema: it requires the user's Cotlet API key with access to this app, an auth prerequisite the agent otherwise couldn't infer.

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 return contents are stated twice – once in the title-prefixed opener and again in the second sentence – which is redundant. The content is front-loaded and the sentences are short, but the duplication wastes space.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully spells out what comes back, and annotations cover the read-only profile. For a single-item getter with one documented parameter, the agent has enough to call it correctly, though a note on error/not-found behavior is absent.

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% and the single parameter is documented ('Listing ID from list_my_listings'). The description only reinforces that the result is one of the caller's listings; it adds no ID format or sourcing 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 (get) and resource (one listing) and enumerates the returned payload (property details, asking price, description, documents, public URL). It implicitly separates itself from the list tool via 'one of your listings,' but never names crexi_list_my_listings explicitly.

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?

Gives a concrete usage trigger: 'check what is live before changing status or contacting leads,' which orients the agent toward the read-before-write workflow. It lacks an explicit when-not or a named alternative such as list_my_listings.

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