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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description adds real context beyond that: the field inventory returned and the fact that media/visit data is gated behind include. It omits auth requirements, but for a read-only lookup that is a minor gap.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns before the include hint and the endpoint. The telegraphic phrasing ('Add include=... for media and visits') trades a little readability for density but wastes no words.

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 only two parameters at full schema coverage and no output schema, the main missing piece an agent would want is the return shape — and the description supplies a field inventory that compensates. Only the when-to-use-vs-siblings question remains unanswered.

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 include property already documents the allowed relations and the unknown-value fallback. The description's include examples (images, videos, orders.appointments) largely duplicate that, so it sits at the baseline rather than adding syntax or selection guidance.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('One listing by id') and enumerates what comes back (address, status, price, lot/building details, agents). The singular-vs-plural contrast with aryeo_list_listings is implicit rather than stated, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

Gives concrete guidance on when to pass include ('Add include=images,videos,orders.appointments for media and visits'), but never says when to use this versus aryeo_list_listings or aryeo_get_listing_stats. Usage is implied by the parameter, not by the tool choice.

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