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

Beyond annotations (which mark it as a non-destructive, open-world write), the description adds that it reaches other people and requires per-call confirmation, that confirmation can be disabled, and that a Cotlet API key with app access is needed. It also notes market-dependent duration options, all meaningful behavioral context.

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 purpose, then behavior, then requirements in a logical order. It repeats listing types and durations that the schema already defines, adding mild redundancy, but the sentences are otherwise tight.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by stating it returns the live status and portal URL. Combined with the confirmation and auth-key requirements, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 listing_id, listing_type, and duration are already documented with enums. The description mostly repeats the standard/featured/premium and 15-day/1-month options, adding only the 'options your market shows may differ' nuance, so it sits at the high-coverage baseline.

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States a specific verb (publish/put live) and resource (a draft or unpublished listing), and the outcome (live status). It clearly contrasts with siblings like property-finder_unpublish_listing and property-finder_create_listing without needing their schemas.

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?

Specifies the triggering condition ('draft or unpublished listing') and describes the listing-type choice on the Publish screen, giving clear context. It does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g., create_listing or upgrade_listing) or state when not to use it.

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