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

Annotations already declare the tool safe, read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: the tool returns specific fields and clarifies that 'owner info' is available only when obtainable, and that the tool is restricted to US addresses. This goes 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?

Two concise sentences with no unnecessary words. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and details what data is returned.

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 rich annotations and output schema (present but not shown), the description is sufficient. It covers the tool's scope (US address), data returned, and optional nature of owner info. Minor gap: no mention of error cases, but acceptable for this context.

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% with full descriptions for both parameters (_apiKey and address). The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so baseline score applies.

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 verb 'get' and resource 'property details for a US address', listing specific return fields (bedrooms, bathrooms, square footage, lot size, year built, property type, owner info). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_rent_estimate' or 'entity_profile'.

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 usage for retrieving property details for a US address, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_rent_estimate' for rent only, 'entity_profile' for broader entity info). No when-not or exclusions are mentioned.

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