datasets_housing_markets_item

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

With no annotations, the description effectively conveys the behavior: it returns one record by default, or a monthly series when `history=true`, including envelope structure and sorting. However, it does not disclose potential issues like data staleness, authentication requirements, or rate limits.

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 paragraph of about 6 sentences, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence adds information, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) for readability. Still efficient and concise.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers essential aspects: supported enums, defaults, and the history mode behavior. It omits error handling and exact response format for single records, but overall is sufficiently complete for a data retrieval 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?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by listing enum values for region_type and property_type explicitly, stating defaults, and explaining the effect of the `history` parameter on the response structure.

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?

Clearly states the action (Get a US housing market record), the resource (dataset id `housing-markets`), and the key identifiers (region_type, table_id). Distinguishes from sibling tools like datasets_housing_markets_search and datasets_housing_markets_facets by specifying it returns a single record.

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?

Provides details on parameters and their defaults but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings like datasets_housing_markets_search (for multiple records) or datasets_housing_markets_facets (for aggregations). No 'when-not' or alternative recommendations are given.

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