Zillow56 MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions search functionality but doesn't describe pagination behavior (implied by the 'page' parameter), rate limits, authentication needs, or what the response format looks like. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 that front-loads the core purpose. However, it contains a typo ('professoinals') and could be slightly more structured by separating examples or clarifying parameters, but it's generally concise with no wasted words.

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 complexity of a search tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, response format, pagination, and usage context, making it inadequate for an AI agent to fully understand how to invoke and interpret results from this tool.

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 documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value by mentioning search by 'location or name', which aligns with the 'location' and 'name' parameters, but doesn't explain the 'type' parameter's purpose or provide context beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Search for professionals') and the resource ('professionals'), with specific examples of professional types (property managers, inspectors, photographers, home improvement, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on agents, builders, lenders, or properties, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'search_for_agents' or 'search_for_builders' beyond the professional type scope.

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 like 'search_for_agents' or 'search_for_builders', nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. It only states what the tool does, not when it's appropriate.

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