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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, closed-world catalogue lookup. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: sold-out projects are excluded by default unless include_sold_out is true, and it lists the fields returned.

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 tightly written sentences cover purpose, filtering, return fields, and the sold-out default. The most important scoping information is front-loaded with no wasted phrasing.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields. Given full parameter schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the definition gives an agent enough information to call the tool correctly.

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 all nine parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates the main filter categories and include_sold_out behavior but adds little parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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?

The description states a clear verb and resource ("List off-plan projects") and scopes it to the site catalogue. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as get_project_details, compare_projects, or search_site.

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?

It names supported filter dimensions, which implies how to use the tool for discovery. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus alternatives like search_site or get_project_details, and no exclusions beyond sold-out handling.

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