house_pricesv2auto_complete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'Get suggestions' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like response format, error conditions, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether this is a read-only operation. The description provides minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 appropriately concise at one sentence. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Get suggestions') and could be slightly more structured by specifying what type of suggestions, but there's no wasted verbiage or 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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what the suggestions look like (structured data, simple strings, confidence scores), how many results to expect, or any error scenarios. The context of multiple similar sibling tools further highlights the incompleteness.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents the single 'addressPartial' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain format expectations, examples, or constraints beyond the schema's 'City, district, ward, area, etc....' description.

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 states the tool 'Get suggestions by term or phrase about city, country, area, etc...' which indicates it provides autocomplete suggestions for location-related terms. However, it's vague about what kind of suggestions (e.g., real estate listings, geographic names) and doesn't clearly differentiate from sibling tools like 'v2auto_complete' or 'auto_complete_deprecated' that appear to serve similar functions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple autocomplete-related siblings (v2auto_complete, auto_complete_deprecated), there's no indication of differences in scope, data sources, or performance characteristics that would help an agent choose appropriately.

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