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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds substantive behavior beyond that: only currently available items are returned, prices are limited to brand-published values with an explicit no-estimation rule, and the result payload differs for plain vs catalogue items.

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?

Four tight sentences: purpose/scope first, then filter dimensions, then return payload, then the availability and pricing caveats. Nothing is repeated from the schema verbatim and no sentence is padding.

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 25 optional parameters and no output schema, the description carries the return-shape burden and does so: it names all returned fields and the availability/pricing constraints. Remaining gaps are minor, such as pagination behavior beyond the limit cap and what the 'status' field values mean.

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% with 25 well-annotated parameters, so the schema does the heavy lifting and the baseline would be 3. The description adds real interpretive value by grouping the filters into words, kind, sector, category, price range and sector attributes (city, bedrooms, make, year, mileage), which tells an agent how the 25 params cohere across the property/vehicle/product/service verticals.

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 (Search) and a precisely bounded resource: the products, services and catalogue items the brand officially offers, with the verticals enumerated (property listings, vehicles, shop products). Combined with the returned-field list (name, summary, price, URL, status, photo, last updated), an agent can tell this is the bulk discovery tool rather than a single-item fetch like get_offer.

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 some operative guidance inside the call: "Omit to list everything" for query, and "if a price is missing, do not estimate it" for handling results. However, it never says when to prefer this over siblings such as get_offer, get_services or answer_question, and offers no exclusions or prerequisites, so the when-to-use decision is only implied by the tool's scope.

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