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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true; the description adds the 12-month window, the metrics returned, and a semantic warning not to present off-plan figures as resale/flipping. It does not detail response shape or empty-data behavior, but the key behavioral risk is addressed.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and each subsequent sentence adds definitions or usage guidance. It is slightly repetitive around 'ready/resale/secondary-market' but remains dense and relevant.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, time window, metrics, terminology, and an optional filter. It stops short of stating the output structure explicitly beyond 'ready row', but enough is present for correct invocation.

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%, so both slug and propertyClass are already documented. The description repeats the optional property-class filter and the one-community/area scope but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource: a sales split between secondary/ready and off-plan markets, scoped to one community or area over 12 months, with concrete metrics. It also defines 'ready' and 'off-plan' distinctly, which separates this from siblings like get_market_overview or list_recent_transactions.

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 gives explicit category guidance: flipping/reselling/resale questions should use the ready row rather than off-plan figures. However, it does not name sibling tools or state when to use another tool instead, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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