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

Annotations only cover readOnlyHint, so the description earns credit for disclosing pagination behavior ('Cursor-paginated') and enumerating the returned fields, which matters since no output schema exists. It stops short of noting auth requirements, rate limits, or ordering guarantees.

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 the core purpose and scope, followed by pagination and endpoint mapping. No filler; every sentence carries distinct information.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return-field inventory, the pagination contract, and the agency scope, which is close to sufficient. It lacks field-type or ordering detail but nothing blocks a 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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (limit, cursor, agency_uid, updated_since) are already documented in the schema at high quality. The description only hints at the agency scoping via 'an agency's properties' and adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (an agency's properties/rentals), and enumerates the fields returned (name, address, type, bedrooms, active flag, pricing/availability). It is clearly a bulk-list operation distinct from hostfully_get_property, though it never explicitly contrasts the two.

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?

Usage is implied: call this to enumerate an agency's properties, and paginate with a cursor. There is no explicit when/when-not guidance or pointer to alternatives such as hostfully_get_property for a single record. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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