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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses the lifecycle (draft, not live), visibility ('visible only to you and your agency. It reaches no one'), reversibility ('you can delete it in PF Expert'), the no-confirmation behavior, and the auth requirement (Cotlet API key with app access).

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?

It is front-loaded with the draft status and return value, and every sentence carries useful context. There is mild repetition between 'Nothing goes live until you publish it' and the visibility/reach statements, which slightly dilutes it.

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 12-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description covers the lifecycle, the returned identifier, the visibility model, the auth prerequisite, and the handoff to publish_listing. Nothing an agent needs to invoke 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 12 parameters, including the sale/rent enum and agent_id sourced from list_agents. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the structured fields, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Saves a draft in PF Expert and returns its listing_id') and explicitly scopes it as a draft rather than a live listing, which cleanly separates it from publish_listing and update_listing among its 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?

It names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it: 'Run publish_listing to put it live.' It also tells the agent this call needs no confirmation, so the agent knows not to seek approval before invoking it.

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