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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered; the description adds the meaningful scoping constraint that data is limited to the caller's own account and includes the underlying endpoint path. It says nothing about pagination behavior, default result volume, or rate limits, keeping it short of a 5.

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 with the scope restriction front-loaded ahead of the endpoint path. The trailing 'GET /clients/featured' is minimally useful developer context rather than padding, but it is the least load-bearing sentence.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by enumerating returned fields (address, price, status, photos, agent). With all 7 parameters fully documented in the schema and safety covered by annotations, the remaining gap is only the absence of any hint about default result size or time-window behavior.

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% across all 7 parameters, so limit/offset/fields/interval/date_type/start_datetime are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the returned-field list, which matches the baseline 3 for schema-covered tools.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (featured/active listings) and enumerates the returned attributes (address, price, status, photos, agent). The 'only the account's own listings, never general MLS data' clause separates it from MLS-wide siblings, though it does not name those siblings 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?

The scope statement implies when this tool applies (account's own featured listings), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus idx_list_off_market_listings, idx_list_sold_pending_listings, or idx_list_supplemental_listings, nor any note on prerequisites such as account type.

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