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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It states the return limit and filter behavior, but does not mention whether the tool is read-only, rate limits, or error handling. It adequately covers core behavior for a search tool but leaves some gaps.

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?

Two sentences, each essential. The first sentence defines purpose and key constraints; the second provides guidance. No wasted words, and critical information is front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description explains the output format (up to 25 listings) but lacks details on the fields returned, sorting, or pagination. While adequate for basic use, it leaves uncertainty about what data each listing contains.

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?

All 8 parameters are fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond stating the return limit, which is not parameter-specific. Thus, it meets the baseline expectation but does not exceed it.

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 the tool searches active listings in SC+GA, with a limit of 25. The verb 'Search' and resource 'listings' are explicit, and the geographic scope differentiates it from sibling tools like scout.coverage or scout.market_pulse.

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 includes an explicit recommendation to use scout.coverage() first if coverage is uncertain, providing clear guidance on when to use an alternative. While it doesn't list all scenarios, this single instruction is practical and relevant.

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