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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the filtering behavior (results limited to homes/apartments), but does not explain the reduced-count/pagination quirk that the schema mentions, nor rate limits or auth needs.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and scope come first. The trailing clause is slightly redundant with the schema's filtering explanation but does not bloat the description.

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 an output schema present and 100% schema coverage, return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. Still, the description omits any routing guidance against the many sibling Agoda search/detail tools, leaving selection partly to inference.

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 city, city_id, page and limit are already fully documented, including precedence and the filtered-count caveat. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 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 names a specific verb (search), resource (Agoda Homes & Apartments) and scope (by city), which lets an agent separate it from agoda_hotels_search by accommodation type. It stops short of explicitly naming that sibling, and the phrase 'full listing detail for every matching property' muddies whether this returns search results or property detail records.

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: 'search by city' signals the input shape but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over agoda_hotels_search, agoda_hotel_detail, or the activities search. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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