get_real_estate_transactions

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It names the external data source, lists the included data fields, and states the return format as a list plus markdown summary. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or error handling, but for a public-data retrieval tool the essential behavior is disclosed.

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 compact and well-structured with a summary sentence followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds useful information and there is no filler or repetition.

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 the output schema, the parameter explanations, and the stated return format, an agent has enough to invoke the tool correctly. Minor gaps remain around valid area-code formats and possible error conditions, but these are not critical for a straightforward 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates by defining all three parameters: area as a region name or code with examples, year as a transaction-year filter, and quarter as a 1–4 range. This adds meaning that the raw schema completely lacks.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieves real estate transaction price information from the MLIT real estate information library. It also lists the data fields included, such as transaction type, price, area, construction year, and nearest station, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_population or get_regional_data.

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?

Gives clear usage context: the tool is for obtaining real estate transaction data for a specified area, with optional filtering by year and quarter. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the intended context is unambiguous.

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