rightmove_agents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that pagination follows Rightmove's current directory pages and that result counts can vary, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention whether the location parameter must be a numeric ID (though the schema does), rate limits, or what happens with invalid locations. The pagination caveat adds value beyond the 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by return fields and a pagination caveat. It's efficient and every sentence earns its place, though the second sentence could be slightly more compact.

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 list tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, source, returned fields, and pagination behavior. It doesn't explain the return format in detail, but with no output schema and a simple list use case, the description is reasonably complete. The pagination caveat is a nice touch that helps agents set expectations.

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 both parameters. The description adds context that the location is a Rightmove location identifier from autocomplete and that page defaults to 1, but this largely mirrors the schema. The description's mention of pagination aligns with the page parameter but doesn't add new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 lists Rightmove estate agents for a location, specifies the source (Rightmove's estate-agents directory), and enumerates the returned fields (branch display name, brand, address, telephones, sales/lettings flags, logo, branch profile link). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like rightmove_search, rightmove_property, and rightmove_agent_branch.

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 implies usage context: use this tool when you need estate-agent branches for a location from Rightmove's directory. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like rightmove_agent_branch or rightmove_search, but the location-based listing purpose is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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