Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• get_rental_detailsB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the return value but omits behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error cases. For a read endpoint, this is a significant gap.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single dense sentence that lists many return fields. While not verbose, it could be restructured (e.g., bullet points) for improved readability. It is not wasteful but could be more scannable.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given a single parameter and no output schema, the description provides a fairly comprehensive list of what is returned. It covers major sections of the response, though details like field types or nested structures are not specified. Overall, it is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and output.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with a single parameter described. The description adds marginal value by clarifying the id comes from search_rentals results and providing an example, but the schema already explains the parameter adequately.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool fetches full details for a single rental listing by id, and enumerates the returned data (description, amenities, pricing history, building info, transit, schools, media). It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_rentals (broad search) and list_amenities/list_areas (categorical listings).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description instructs to use the `id` from search_rentals results, implying a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives beyond the sibling context.

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

• list_amenitiesA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not mention side effects, permissions, or stability of the list. However, as a read-only list operation, the description is adequate but not rich.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence, direct, and to the point. No unnecessary words, and examples are provided for clarity.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a parameter-less tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what is returned and its purpose. It could explicitly state the return format, but examples make it clear.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining that the output is meant for use with search_rentals, justifying the tool's existence.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states it lists valid amenity tokens for search_rentals, providing examples. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_rentals (which consumes the tokens) and other list tools.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies the tool should be used before constructing search_rentals queries with amenity filters. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the purpose is narrow and clear.

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

• list_areasA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Discloses matching behavior (case/spacing-insensitivity) and that it returns names and codes. With no annotations, this adequately conveys the read-only, non-destructive nature of the tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No redundant words, every sentence serves a clear function.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs: purpose, parameter usage, return content, and integration with sibling tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema covers 100% of parameters, but description adds value by explaining how the search parameter works (case/spacing-insensitive matching, examples). Adds meaning beyond schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Explicitly states 'List StreetEasy area names and their numeric codes' with a specific verb and resource. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_rentals by focusing on area codes for use in that tool.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  States the tool is 'for use in search_rentals' and describes optional filtering with examples. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives but clearly implies the context of retrieving area codes for rental searches.

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

• search_rentalsA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the return structure (compact list, totalCount, pagination, image URLs, url) and the read-only nature implicitly. Lacks explicit statements about auth or rate limits, but sufficient for a search tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single paragraph with no fluff. Every sentence adds necessary information: purpose, area/amenity inputs, pagination, output fields. Front-loaded with main purpose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given 14 parameters with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's functionality: filters, valid inputs via sibling tools, pagination, and key output fields. Complete for a search tool context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by clarifying areas accept names or numeric codes, amenities are uppercase enum tokens, and directs to sibling tools for valid values. Also explains pagination parameters and output fields.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it searches active NYC rental listings with filters. It distinguishes itself from siblings (get_rental_details, list_amenities, list_areas) by specifying the search and filter functionality.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides guidance on using list_areas and list_amenities to discover valid inputs, and explains pagination. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide exclusion criteria.

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