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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and scope are covered. The description's long field enumeration is return-value content, which is largely redundant given that an output schema exists, and it says nothing about auth, rate limits, or error behavior. It adds little beyond the structured fields.

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 that leads with the verb and resource. The trailing field list is long and largely duplicative of the output schema, which slightly dilutes the otherwise tight structure.

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 single-id lookup with annotations and an output schema present, the definition covers everything needed to invoke it correctly. The returned-field enumeration is redundant against the output schema but not harmful, so nothing essential is missing.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents the id fully (including the p_<id> URL form). The description adds the 'numeric' qualifier and the greystar_search origin, but that information is also present in the schema, so it is baseline reinforcement rather than new meaning.

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 ('Get') and resource ('public Greystar apartment community profile') plus the lookup key ('numeric property id'). It clearly reads as a detail-fetch, distinguishing it from the sibling greystar_search that produces the id.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent where the required id comes from ('from greystar_search'), which establishes the search-then-detail workflow. It does not state an explicit when-not-to-use or name a competing detail sibling, so it stops short of a 5.

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