Realty In Ca1 MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not indicate whether this is read-only, what happens if the property is not found, rate limits, or the structure of returned data. 'Get' implies a safe read operation but this is not explicit.

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 single sentence is efficient with no filler words, delivering the core purpose immediately. While brief, it avoids the tautology trap and every word earns its place, though additional sentences would improve completeness.

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?

Given the absence of annotations, no output schema, and the existence of numerous sibling tools with overlapping domains, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain return values, distinguish scope from other property retrieval tools, or clarify the dependency on list endpoints for required parameters.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific context beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., it doesn't explain the relationship between ReferenceNumber and PropertyID or provide guidance on measurement/culture defaults).

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 verb (Get) and resource (details of specific property), establishing a clear purpose. However, it fails to differentiate from siblings like propertiesget_demographics or propertiesget_scores, leaving ambiguity about what specific 'details' this tool returns versus those alternatives.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention the prerequisite of obtaining ReferenceNumber and PropertyID from list endpoints first (though this is hinted in parameter schemas). Lacks explicit workflow context.

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