find_long_sitting_listings

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that the tool is read-only, describe pagination behavior, sorting, or what the response contains. While a 'find' tool is implicitly non-destructive, the absence of explicit behavioral information leaves 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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It captures the core concept efficiently.

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?

Despite having 11 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is minimal. It lacks context about how filters interact, what the default behavior is (e.g., default min_days=30), and how results are ordered. The description is too sparse for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 55%, so the description must add meaning. It clarifies min_days as the market-duration threshold and hints at price cuts (min_price_drops), but it doesn't explain make, model, transmission, price_max, or radius-related parameters. The description partially compensates but is not comprehensive.

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 the tool returns active listings that have been on the market for at least min_days, optionally with price cuts. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_new_listings, find_price_drops, and search_cars by focusing on listing age and price-drop count. However, it doesn't explicitly mention the resource scope or contrast with 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 description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios. An agent cannot tell from the description whether to choose this over search_cars or get_price_history.

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