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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It adds useful context by naming public data sources (Ministerio del Interior, OSE, IM) and explaining ranking semantics for rent, monthly, safety, and services. No contradiction with annotations.

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 the purpose front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is dense, but the packed list of compared data points is relevant and earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema and six optional parameters, so the description must carry a lot of weight. It covers the returned data well, but it does not describe the output shape, default behavior when neither neighborhoods nor rankBy is provided, or how department interacts with the Montevideo-specific ranking.

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 only 33%, and the description partially compensates by explaining the rankBy enum values and how neighborhoods is used. However, it leaves limit, bedrooms, type defaults, and the relationship between department and the Montevideo-specific ranking under-explained despite the low schema coverage.

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 opens with 'Compara barrios lado a lado', a specific verb-resource pair, and enumerates the exact data dimensions compared (rent, crime, water cuts, services, ranking). It is clearly distinguishable from sibling rental/property tools, though it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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 explicitly gives two invocation modes: pass neighborhoods to compare them or pass rankBy to list the best, and it defines each rankBy value. It does not mention when to choose this tool over siblings or give exclusions, but the within-tool usage guidance is clear and actionable.

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