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

Annotations already establish the safe read profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), and the description adds the auth requirement ('Needs the user's Cotlet API key with access to this app') plus the views-count content, which the annotations do not cover.

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 resource, but the opening two sentences redundantly restate 'Published listings' and the views count. The 'next_cursor back as cursor' phrasing is also slightly tangled against the schema's single 'cursor' field.

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 definition covers the returned fields, pagination, an ownership scope, and the API-key prerequisite. Only the relationship to sibling tools like list_saved_listings is left implicit.

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 contract, cursor and limit are already documented; the description reinforces the sale/rent filter and pagination flow but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (Published listings on Immobiliare.it) and enumerates the fields returned. The 'Published' scope distinguishes it from list_saved_listings and get_listing, though it never names those siblings 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?

Offers workflow guidance ('Use listing_id from each item in the other tools') and a filtering hint ('Filter by sale or rent'), which imply usage. However, it never states when to prefer this over immobiliare_get_listing or immobiliare_list_saved_listings, so routing is left to inference.

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