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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: results are shallow (ids, titles, URLs) and full text requires a follow-up fetch call, which prevents an agent from assuming it already has the listing content. Auth, rate limits and pagination are still unstated.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences, each doing distinct work: what it does, what it returns plus the follow-up tool, and the alternative for filtered search. No filler.

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 one fully documented parameter and an output schema present, the description only needs purpose, routing and scope. It supplies all three, including the explicit hand-off to fetch, so nothing needed to call 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% and the query parameter already documents 'city, district or street'. The description's 'by place name' restates the same idea without adding format, syntax or length guidance, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb (Find) and resource (listings on new.estate) plus the driving input (place name), which immediately separates it from search_listings and fetch. An agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit routing: use fetch for full listing text, use search_listings for filters like price, size or property type. The when-to-use-this vs when-to-use-siblings conditions are stated outright rather than implied.

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