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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds useful behavioral context by explaining that results are titles to be passed to tibia_get for location/position. No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences front-load the purpose, provide a concrete example, and give a cross-tool pointer. Every word earns its place with no repetition of schema content.

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?

With an output schema present and self-explanatory parameter names, the description is largely complete. It could mention default sort order or the include_inactive default, but the example disambiguates the primary use case and the follow-up to tibia_get is important context.

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 just 44%, so the description carries some burden. It names the key filter dimensions (city, rent, beds, size) and gives an example, but it does not clarify the semantics of beds_min, size_min, is_guildhall, include_inactive, limit, or cursor beyond their names.

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 the verb 'find', the specific resources 'Tibia houses and guildhalls', and the filtering dimensions 'by city, rent, beds and size'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling find_* tools like tibia_find_creatures or tibia_find_items.

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 gives a concrete example of when to use the tool ('cheapest house in Thais with two beds') and a follow-up instruction to call tibia_get with a title. It does not explicitly list exclusions versus alternatives, but the resource-specific focus makes the context clear.

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