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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: the Cotlet API key requirement and the fact that each result carries a property_id consumed by other Mashvisor tools. It does not describe pagination or result volume, which would be the remaining gap.

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 key scoping facts lead, but the ranking concept is repeated twice ('ranked by cash on cash return for your budget' and again 'ranked by cash on cash return for the rental strategy you pick'), and the 'Mashvisor: Property Finder:' prefix adds little. Tighter phrasing would remove real redundancy.

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 shoulders the return-value burden and does so by naming the property_id field and its downstream consumers. Combined with the API-key prerequisite and city/radius constraint, an agent has enough to call it correctly, though result format and volume remain unstated.

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 all seven parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates the rental-strategy choice and the single-city radius rule, mirroring rather than extending the schema (baseline 3 for full coverage).

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 ('searches for-sale properties in one or more cities') plus the ranking dimension (cash on cash return for a chosen rental strategy). It also distinguishes itself by noting the returned property_id feeds the analysis, comps and Saved Homes tools. The 'as in Property Finder' phrasing is slightly confusing since property-finder is a separate app, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Implies the search context (for-sale investor search ranked by rental return) but never states when to pick this over mashvisor_search_markets, mashvisor_run_filter_preset, or the saved-filter flow. The only conditional guidance ('Radius works only with one city') is parameter-level, not tool-selection guidance.

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