rightmove_autocomplete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it returns suggestions, with no mention of being read-only, any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or limitations. For a simple autocomplete tool this might be acceptable, but the lack of any behavioral context beyond the return value is a gap.

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 with no extraneous words. The primary action and resource are front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence clarifies the source and purpose. It is appropriately concise and well-structured.

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 autocomplete tool, the description adequately conveys that it returns location suggestions from Rightmove. It does not describe the return format (no output schema exists), but for this purpose the statement is sufficient. It could mention that results are limited to locations, but that is implied. Overall, it is complete enough for the agent to understand and call the tool correctly.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for both 'query' and 'limit' (100% coverage). The description's phrase 'for a given query' aligns with the schema but adds no new meaning. Since the schema fully documents parameters, the description does not need to compensate, so a baseline of 3 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Rightmove location autocomplete suggestions', and explains it returns suggestions for a given query. It is specific and distinct from other Rightmove tools like rightmove_search or rightmove_agents, and differentiates from other autocomplete tools by naming Rightmove explicitly.

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 when a user needs location suggestions for Rightmove, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternative autocomplete tools (e.g., zillow_autocomplete, apple_maps_autocomplete) or when not to use it. There is no mention of exclusions or preferred scenarios, leaving the agent to infer based on the tool name.

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