rightmove_new_homes_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds one useful behavioral trait: results are individual homes/plots with development flags, not development-level cards. However, it doesn't cover other behavioral aspects such as pagination behavior, rate limits, or how the required location identifier is obtained.

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?

Two tight sentences: the first front-loads the core purpose, the second adds the filter scope and the crucial granularity caveat. No filler, no repetition of schema text; every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the search intent and result granularity but leaves gaps: how to obtain the required location identifier (schema says 'from autocomplete' but doesn't direct the agent to the autocomplete tool), pagination semantics, and the shape of the results. Adequate for basic use but incomplete for full self-service.

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 nine parameters. The description merely summarizes 'price, bedroom, bathroom, and property-type filters' without adding meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 states a specific verb ('Search'), a clear resource ('Rightmove's new-homes-for-sale listings'), a location scope, and the available filter dimensions. It also distinguishes the result granularity (individual new-build homes/plots vs. development-level cards), which sets it apart from sibling tools like rightmove_search and rightmove_commercial_search.

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 clearly frames the tool's context: new homes for sale only, with a location and filters. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the focus on 'new homes' and the result-granularity caveat give an agent enough context to choose this over the general rightmove_search. Lacks an explicit exclusion statement, hence not a 5.

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