Wohnungen

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and locality are covered. The description adds only that results include area and usage type, but this is essentially return-field information that the existing output schema already carries, leaving behavior such as ordering, pagination, or empty-result handling undisclosed.

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 short sentence with no wasted words, though it is not front-loaded with an explicit action and reads more like a label than a functional statement.

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 simple one-parameter list tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description covers the basic resource scope. It is minimally adequate but lacks explicit usage context and any behavioral detail beyond the returned attributes.

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?

The single property_id parameter is fully documented in the schema, including a reference to list_properties. The description itself adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 for 100% schema coverage 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 identifies the resource (apartments/units of a property) and mentions the attributes area and usage type, but it is a noun phrase rather than a clear verb+resource statement. It does not explicitly say it lists them, relying on the tool name to convey the action, and it does not distinguish itself from siblings such as list_properties beyond the property 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The only implicit routing is the schema note pointing to list_properties for the property ID, which is not part of the description itself.

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