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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true) by disclosing what actually happens: the listing leaves search but persists as 'unpublished', existing leads are retained, the default confirmation gate can be switched off, and a Cotlet API key with app access is required. This is exactly the side-effect and auth context an agent needs for a mutation tool.

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Front-loads the core action, but repeats itself ('It stays in PF Expert' then 'keeps it in PF Expert with status unpublished') and the two confirmation sentences are verbose and partially overlapping. Noticeably redundant for such a simple tool.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers effect, reversibility, side effects on leads, confirmation behavior, and auth requirements. 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 coverage is 100% and the schema itself documents listing_id as 'Listing ID from list_listings'. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 for schema-covered parameters 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?

States a specific verb+resource (unpublish a listing) and clearly describes the effect: removes it from Property Finder search while keeping it in PF Expert as unpublished. The contrast with re-publishing is implied, but it never names a sibling like publish_listing or update_listing, so routing still relies on inference.

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 when to use it ('take a live listing off the portal') and notes the reversible follow-up ('publish it again later'), but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not framing or named alternative to distinguish it from update_listing.

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