olx_precios_mercado

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description restates the output metrics, which is largely redundant given the output schema exists, and adds no behavioral context such as rate limits, scraping/sampling caveats, or data freshness.

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 compact sentences, with the concrete output metrics front-loaded ahead of the use-case clause. Nothing is wasted, though it is terse enough that it omits context an agent might want.

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?

With a full output schema, complete parameter coverage, and annotations covering safety, the description only needs to frame purpose and use — which it does adequately. The main residual gap is no signal about the sampling nature (paginas) or how to act on the returned range.

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 all four parameters (tipo, paginas, ubicacion, habitaciones) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides (only an implicit 'zona' hinting at ubicacion), which matches the baseline 3 for high-coverage schemas.

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 names the specific resource (reference rental price for a zone) and enumerates exactly what it computes: median, P25–P75 range, total monthly with condo+IPTU, and R$/m². This clearly separates it from siblings like olx_buscar_alquileres (search) and olx_ver_anuncio (view), though it never explicitly names those alternatives.

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 closing clause 'Útil para saber si un anuncio está caro o sospechosamente barato' implies a use case (price sanity-checking a listing) but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not framing and never points to olx_comparar_anuncios or olx_analizar_riesgo as the alternatives for related decisions. Usage is left to inference.

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