get_propertyUse this when the user wants the details of one authorized PropFácil listing and has supplied a listingKey or ID from search_properties.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | A listingKey or listing ID returned by search_properties. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| property | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is known to be safe. The description adds that only authorized listings are accessible and that input must come from search_properties, which is useful behavioral context beyond the 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?
The description is one concise, front-loaded sentence that gives the trigger condition, the input source, and the scope of the operation. There is no wasted wording or redundancy.
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 the single parameter, complete schema coverage, safe read-only annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary context. It fully communicates what the tool does, when it applies, and what input is needed.
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 the schema already explains that 'id' is a listingKey or listing ID returned by search_properties. The description essentially repeats this schema information, adding no new parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 retrieves details for one authorized PropFácil listing, using a listingKey or ID from search_properties. The verb 'get' plus the specific resource and prerequisite distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_properties or my_listings.
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 says when to use the tool: when the user wants details for one listing and has supplied an ID from search_properties. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the condition 'one authorized listing plus ID from search_properties' makes the usage context clear.
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.
Most tools have a distinct resource-action pair, making selection generally clear. The main ambiguity is between get_property_list and list_property_lists, both of which involve favorite lists and could be confused by an agent despite different singular/plural meanings.
The majority of tools follow a snake_case action_noun pattern like search_properties, save_property_to_list, and rename_property_list. The exceptions are my_listings, which uses a possessive noun with no verb, plus get_property_contact and restore_property_results, which slightly break the otherwise consistent pattern.
Thirteen tools is a well-scoped set for a property search, listing publication, and favorite-list management server. Each tool supports a concrete workflow or user intent, with no obvious duplicated or filler tools.
The favorite-list workflows are reasonably complete, but there are notable lifecycle gaps: property listings can be published and searched but not updated, delisted, or deleted, and there is no explicit create-list operation for naming custom lists beyond the default behavior. This creates awkward workarounds for some common user requests.