French commune market stats (DVF)

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint as true, and the description adds that yoyPricePerM2Pct returns null if insufficient data, disclosing edge-case behavior. No contradictions.

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 concise paragraphs, front-loaded with core purpose, then parameter guidance, then return values. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers parameters and return values well, but lacks notes on data freshness, error handling, or performance. Still highly adequate given good annotations.

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%, but the description adds clarity by summarizing the exclusivity of address/citycode and listing return fields not in the schema. It goes beyond the baseline 3.

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 it computes commune-level real-estate market statistics from DVF, specifying exact metrics like median/p25/p75 EUR/m² and sales volume. It distinguishes from sibling tools (geocode, price estimate, transactions) by focusing on aggregative stats.

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 explicitly says to provide either 'address' or 'citycode', guiding parameter selection. It does not directly contrast with siblings for when to use this tool vs alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough.

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