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

Annotations already convey read-only/idempotent/non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the tool returns ZHVI values and serves as a name resolver, but it does not disclose output shape, matching behavior, or search edge cases.

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 filler; the core capability is stated first and the downstream relationship is given in one clear sentence.

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?

For a simple search tool it states what it returns, how querying works, and where it fits in the real-estate workflow. Without an output schema, a bit more detail on the response fields could help, but the behavioral guidance is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions including examples and defaults, so the description need not add much. It reinforces that query is a name fragment and type filters to metro/state but does not add new parameter meaning.

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 names a specific action (find real-estate markets by name), defines the output (latest typical home value via ZHVI), and names sibling tools it feeds, so an agent can distinguish it from realestate_trend, realestate_rents, etc.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this before realestate_home_values, realestate_rents, or realestate_trend to discover the region name/id. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use statement or mention of alternatives like realestate_market_screen, but the routing guidance is clear.

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