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

Annotations cover read-only/open-world, and the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: up to 10 images are attached to the result as image content while their URLs appear in `images`, max_images=0 suppresses images, and the response has no ready-made `price` field (pricing arrives via `payment`/`paydaylist`, with blocked_dates and prepayment percentage). That is exactly the kind of non-obvious trait that prevents wrong invocation.

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 the core purpose, then layers parameters, response contents, the pricing caveat, and image behavior. Every paragraph is useful, though the pricing/image notes could be tightened slightly and the multi-line layout is more verbose than strictly needed.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still enumerates what the payload contains (description, address/map, capacity, amenities, rating, price, blocked_dates, online booking) plus the image-content behavior, which is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: listing_slug is the `slug` field from search results, listing_type is house/property, and max_images controls whether images are embedded in the result versus only listed by URL. This goes beyond the schema's own text.

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+resource: returns full details and images for a single listing, identified by slug. It explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling search tools (search_rentals/search_hotels) and the availability tools, so an agent can select it without opening any 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: this tool is for viewing one listing in detail, not for comparing multiple listings with images (search results already include images). It also routes vacancy questions to check_hotel_availability and exact free-date questions to check_availability.

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