searchSearches Croatian real-estate listings (apartments, houses, land, commercial) on trazimstan.hr. Accepts a natural-language query, e.g. "building land in Istria under 200000 EUR" or "stan u Zagrebu do 200.000 €". Returns matching listings with their canonical URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Natural-language search query |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| results | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool accepts queries and returns listings with URLs, but it does not explicitly declare it as read-only or disclose any side effects, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The behavioral disclosure is adequate but minimal.
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 description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and usage.
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?
Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter) and the existence of an output schema, the description adequately explains the input format, provides examples, and summarizes the output. It fully covers the necessary context for selecting and using 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 single parameter 'query' is described in the schema as a natural-language search query, and the description adds concrete examples, which enhance understanding. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds value beyond the schema by illustrating usage patterns.
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?
Description clearly states it searches Croatian real-estate listings on a specific site, accepts natural-language queries, and returns matching listings with URLs. It distinguishes itself from siblings like fetch and get_listing by specifying the search context and query format.
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?
The description implies usage via natural-language queries and provides examples, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like search_listings, which may have similar functionality. No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Fetch and get_listing have nearly identical descriptions and likely duplicate functionality. Similarly, search and search_listings both perform searches with overlapping intent. This makes it unclear which tool to use.
Tool names are inconsistent: some use underscores (get_listing, get_price_stats), others are bare verbs (fetch, search), and one uses a compound (search_listings). No clear pattern emerges.
With 5 tools, the count is reasonable for a real estate information server. However, the presence of duplicate tools suggests the set is not well-scoped and could be reduced to 3.
The server covers search, detail retrieval, and price statistics, which are the core needs. However, it lacks advanced filtering or comparison features, and the redundancy between tools does not add value.