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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and external-data profile is covered. The description adds only the 'new homes' scope, which essentially restates the tool name; it says nothing about pagination, result volume, or how new-build listings differ from resale results.

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 short fragment with zero filler, and the defining scope ('new homes for sale') is front-loaded. It is efficient, though it borders on under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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 safety profile. However, with nine parameters and several sibling search tools, the description leaves the agent without usage guidance or any hint of how this search differs from rightmove_search, leaving a real gap.

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 nine parameters including the location identifier format and price units. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (Rightmove new homes for sale), so an agent can tell it targets new-build listings rather than general resale. It doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives like rightmove_search, rightmove_commercial_search, or rightmove_student_search, so the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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 description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never mentions the sibling search tools an agent must choose between (general rightmove_search, commercial, student). Nothing tells the agent which conditions should route it here.

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