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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the returned metric categories and ZIP-level granularity, but omits data source, freshness, coverage limitations, units for yields/cap rates/inventory, and any access or rate-limit details.

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?

The description is a single efficient sentence that front-loads the metric list and ends with the geographic scope. Every phrase contributes to identifying the data returned, with no redundant or filler text.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description does a fair job listing the metrics an agent will receive. However, it leaves important contextual gaps such as time period, data freshness, units, and geographic coverage, which matter for correct interpretation of the results.

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 both zip_code and country_code are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces ZIP/postcode scoping but adds no new meaning about the country_code parameter or any constraints 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 clearly identifies the resource as residential property statistics and lists specific metrics: prices per sqm/sqft, gross rental yields, cap rates, and inventory. It also scopes the geography to ZIP/postcode, which distinguishes it from the commercial real estate sibling, though it does not use an explicit verb.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getCommercialRealEstate or getParcelZoningInfo. The residential focus implies its use case, but no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-routing guidance is provided.

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