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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, it discloses a paid-call model ($0.002 USDC via x402 on Base, Solana or Arc) and that failed calls are not charged — critical operational context an agent cannot infer. It also specifies result ordering ('nearest first') and that the response includes the total number of properties Student.com maps around the campus.

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 scope, source, and fields come first, followed by input format and pricing — a sensible ordering. It is dense and slightly overloaded in the parentheses (PBSA expansion, payment rails), but every clause carries useful information.

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 present, the description need not list return values, yet it still summarizes the payload and covers geographic scope, input derivation, sorting, and billing. Only the absence of guidance on limit/maxPrice interaction keeps it from a 5.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by clarifying that state/city/university values come from Student.com's university URL slugs. It adds no detail on limit or maxPrice beyond what the schema already says.

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 states a specific resource (student housing near a university), the exact source (Student.com, US/Canada), and the returned fields (name, type, price range, rating, distance, coordinates, URL). This clearly separates it from the general-purpose siblings like realestate_zillow or realestate_hotpads_rentals.

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?

It establishes the niche context (student housing around a specific campus) and the required input format ('the slugs in Student.com's university URL'), which tells an agent when this tool applies. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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