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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description's additional disclosure that these are 'registered' and 'real records' adds useful context about data provenance and ordering beyond the structured annotation. It clarifies that results are factual recent contracts, not estimates or forecasts.

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?

A single, tightly written sentence front-loads the core purpose and immediately conveys the data source and intended use. There is no redundant phrasing or 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?

For a simple read-only list tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description gives enough context about purpose, data source, and usage intent. It does not describe the return shape, but the absence of an output schema makes that a minor gap given the straightforward nature of the tool.

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?

The schema already documents 'kind' and 'slug' well, and the description reinforces that 'sale' means DLD sales and 'rent' means Ejari contracts. However, the 'limit' parameter lacks a description in both schema and tool description, so the coverage gap is not fully compensated.

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 clearly states a specific action and resource: listing the most recent DLD sales or Ejari rent contracts for a location slug. It conveys the factual, record-based nature of the data, which helps separate it from analytic siblings like get_market_overview or get_price_history, though it does not explicitly name a differentiating sibling.

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?

Usage is implied rather than explicit: the phrase 'real records to ground price talk in' suggests when this tool is useful (when concrete recent transactions are needed). However, it does not state when to prefer it over alternatives such as get_price_history or get_market_overview, nor does it give exclusion criteria.

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