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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive); the description adds the behavior that matters: it never spends credits, counts matches and prices one batch, 24-hour free re-pulls, a 250-record cap, offset pagination, and a 10-minute quote expiry. These are non-obvious operational traits an agent must know.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then cost behavior, workflow, pagination and expiry in a logical order, and every sentence carries a constraint or instruction. It is on the longer side, but the length is justified by the amount of distinct behavioral information conveyed.

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 21-parameter, credit-consuming search tool this covers cost model, required workflow sequencing, batch sizing, pagination, expiry, and free re-pull behavior; return values are handled by the output schema, 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 71% schema coverage the baseline is 3, and the description goes further by grouping the 21 filters into place, type, beds/baths, value/equity, year built, distress flags and owner filters, and by flagging zip as the 'narrowest and cheapest' place filter. It stops short of adding syntax detail beyond what the schema already documents.

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 ('quotes') and resource ('a search of national property data'), then bounds the scope ('any US property, including NYC properties that are not in preforeclosure'). This lets an agent separate it from the NYC-only and investor/LLC quote siblings without opening a schema.

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 says 'Always quote first,' names the downstream tool (run_national_property_search) and the exact condition for calling it ('only after the user agrees to the credit cost'). It also advises narrowing filters or batch size for large searches, covering when-not to run broad queries.

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