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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered and the description's job is to add listing behavior. It does add two useful traits beyond annotations: the sort order ('Newest first as Street orders them') and the pagination contract, plus the underlying endpoint. It doesn't describe the 'included' side-loading result, but the core behavior is disclosed.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the definition and scoping before the pagination mechanics; nothing is padded. Minor awkwardness in 'Newest first as Street orders them' is the only friction.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, ordering, pagination, and endpoint are all covered, which is what an agent needs to call it correctly. The remaining gap is that the sibling distinction (lettings/sales/interested applicant lists) is never resolved.

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 are already documented in the schema, including the property UUID filter and the include enum. The description echoes page/page_size but says nothing about the 'property' or 'include' parameters, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct.

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?

It states a specific verb and resource ('List interested applicants') and even defines the term in parentheses ('applicants who showed interest in a property'), so the domain object is unambiguous. What it does not do is distinguish this from the very similarly named siblings street_list_lettings_applicants and street_list_sales_applicants, leaving an agent to guess which list it actually wants.

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 only implied: pagination mechanics are given ('page with page and page_size'), which tells an agent how to iterate but not when to pick this tool over street_get_interested_applicant or the lettings/sales applicant lists. No preconditions or exclusions are stated.

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