propertieslist_deprecated

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'options and filters,' hinting at querying capabilities, but fails to describe critical behaviors such as pagination (implied by parameters but not explained), rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output looks like. For a tool with 32 parameters and no annotations, 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.

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence: 'List properties for sale or rent with options and filters.' It is front-loaded and wastes no words, though it could be slightly more specific to enhance clarity without losing conciseness.

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 tool's complexity (32 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It lacks details on behavioral traits, output format, error handling, and usage context. For a deprecated tool with many options, more guidance is needed to ensure correct invocation.

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%, meaning all parameters are documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond stating 'options and filters,' which is already implied by the schema. However, it does not compensate for any gaps, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'List properties for sale or rent with options and filters.' It specifies the verb ('List'), resource ('properties'), and scope ('for sale or rent'), but does not distinguish it from sibling tools like 'propertiesv2list' or 'propertiesget_nearby_deprecated', which may have overlapping or 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. It does not mention sibling tools, prerequisites, or specific contexts for application. The only implied usage is for listing properties with filters, but this is too vague for effective tool selection.

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