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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, non-destructive, so the write-profile is documented. The description adds cost behavior (spends quoted credits, never more), a single-use constraint, a 10-minute expiry, and a user-consent requirement not captured by annotations.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the credit-spend and one-time-run facts, with zero filler. The consent instruction lands before the expiry caveat.

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?

Complete for a one-param credit-consuming tool with an output schema: cost, consent, expiry, single-execution, and the quote source are all covered, and return shape is handled by the output schema.

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 covers the single quote_id parameter at 100% including its origin, so the schema already does the work. The description reinforces the originating call but adds no syntax or format detail beyond that.

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 (returns rows, spends credits) and resource (NYC underused-building rows from a quote), and distinguishes itself from the sibling search_nyc_underused_properties, which is named directly as the quote creator.

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?

Explicit when-to-use chain: call only with a quote_id from search_nyc_underused_properties, tell the user the cost and get approval first, and notes quotes expire after 10 minutes and run once. That is a full precondition set.

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