Extract all key terms from a commercial lease document. Returns term, base rent schedule, escalations, TI allowance, CAM structure, renewal options, termination rights, exclusivity, co-tenancy, and red flags.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | Raw text copied from a commercial lease PDF |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It lists return content but does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication needs, or limitations (e.g., PDF format only).
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 with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second details return items. Highly efficient.
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 an output schema (indicated by context signals), the description need not explain return values, yet it lists them anyway for clarity. The tool has a single parameter and no nested objects, so the description adequately covers most context. Could mention handling of multi-page documents.
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% and already describes the 'text' parameter. The description adds the context 'raw text copied from a commercial lease PDF', which is mildly helpful but does not significantly enhance understanding 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 uses a specific verb ('Extract') and resource ('commercial lease document'), and lists the specific terms extracted, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like flag_lease_risks.
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 use for lease abstraction but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like flag_lease_risks or generate_deal_memo, nor when not to use it.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: lease documents, rent rolls, DCF models, Excel export, risk flags, deal memos, market data, rates, inflation, demographics at two geographic levels, and land screening at two scales. No two tools have overlapping purposes.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., abstract_lease, get_current_rates, screen_parcel_dd), making the tool surface predictable and easy to navigate.
With 13 tools, the server is well-scoped for CRE investment analysis, covering lease abstraction, rent roll analysis, DCF modeling, market data, demographics, and land screening. The count is sufficient without being bloated.
The tool set covers the full lifecycle of CRE deal analysis: document parsing (lease, rent roll), financial modeling (DCF, Excel export), risk assessment (flag risks, parcel screens), market context (rates, inflation, demographics, CRE market data), and output (deal memo). No obvious gaps for the intended purpose.