license.real-estate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It describes the return data (type, number, holder, status, dates, supervising broker) and query methods, but does not disclose rate limits or authentication requirements. It is sufficiently transparent for a read operation.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and then listing search and return details. Every word is useful, with no fluff.

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?

For a simple lookup tool with no output schema, the description adequately lists return fields and search criteria. However, it does not explain pagination behavior beyond the schema, and it could mention that only TX is supported.

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 43% (3 of 7 parameters described), so the description compensates by explaining that name supports partial match, licenseType is partial, and status is e.g. 'Active'. It also clarifies the required state and the return fields, adding 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 clearly states the tool verifies US real estate licenses, specifically for Texas TREC, and lists the license types (brokers, sales agents, broker companies). It distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like license.broker and license.medical.

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?

The description specifies it is for TX real estate license verification and lists searchable fields, implying when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives.

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