court_auction_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions search functionality but lacks critical behavioral details such as pagination behavior (implied by 'page' parameter), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the response format looks like (no output schema).

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 efficiently structured in two sentences: the first states the core purpose, and the second lists search criteria. Every word serves a purpose with zero waste.

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 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, rate limits), response format, and error handling, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by listing search criteria ('region, property type, price range, or auction date') but does not provide additional semantics beyond what the schema offers.

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 specific action ('Search Korean court auction property listings') and resource ('foreclosed real estate'), with explicit differentiation from sibling tools like 'court_auction_detail' by focusing on search rather than detailed information retrieval.

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 clear context for when to use this tool ('Find foreclosed real estate by region, property type, price range, or auction date'), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like 'court_auction_detail' for detailed views.

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