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 useful non-annotation context: it requires a Cotlet API key with access to the app, and describes what the response contains (property and occupancy).

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 and mostly tight, but the first two sentences are redundant: 'Units with property, rent and whether each is occupied or vacant' and 'Returns units with the property they belong to and their occupancy' say nearly the same thing.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers returns, filter options, a downstream workflow link (create_lease), and the auth requirement. Adequate for correct invocation, though pagination via cursor is left entirely to the 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 100%, so cursor, status, and property_id are already fully documented in the schema. The description restates the filter options (property, occupied/vacant) but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 correct.

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 (list) and resource (units) and describes the returned content: property, rent, occupancy. It is clearly distinct from doorloop_list_properties/list_leases by resource, though it does not explicitly name those siblings.

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 concrete usage context: filter by property or occupancy status, and 'Use unit_id from here in create_lease' establishes a downstream workflow. No when-not or explicit alternative routing is given, keeping it short of a 5.

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