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 genuine behavioral context beyond them: strict validation of filter values against greystar_markets and the id hand-off to greystar_property. It does not discuss pagination limits or result-set size, which the schema partly covers.

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 tight sentences: capability first, validation constraint second, follow-up routing third. No filler, and the most load-bearing constraint (valid filter values) is front-loaded before the pagination/sort clause.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the read-only/open-world profile. The description closes the loop by pointing at greystar_markets for inputs and greystar_property for outputs, leaving no workflow gap for an agent.

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 the schema already documents all 11 parameters in detail, including sort semantics and price-exclusion behavior. The description restates the filter dimensions and the greystar_markets provenance rule, which the schema also states, adding little beyond the baseline.

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 (Search) and resource (Greystar apartment communities), then enumerates the exact filter dimensions. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming greystar_markets as the source of valid filter values and greystar_property as the consumer of result ids.

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 that filter values must originate from greystar_markets and that unknown values are rejected, and routes detail lookups to greystar_property. It stops short of stating when this tool should not be used versus a sibling search, so it is clear context without explicit exclusions.

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