property_dossier

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals it returns 50+ fields, includes AVM and schools, and importantly states the cost ($2.00 USDC from wallet on Base mainnet). This discloses a behavioral trait (payment) beyond typical read operations. Could add rate limits or auth details, but cost transparency is strong.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then details, then usage guidance, then cost. Each sentence adds value. Slightly verbose but well organized. Could merge '50+ fields' line with earlier sentence.

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 tool's complexity (50+ fields, no output schema), the description provides a solid overview of return categories (property, AVM, demographics, schools). The two parameters are well described. The description compensates for lack of output schema by listing data types.

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%, but the description adds value: provides an example address format and notes that 'include' defaults to all sections. This helps the agent understand usage beyond schema definitions.

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?

Tool name 'property_dossier' combined with description 'Comprehensive US property intelligence from a single address' clearly indicates a specific verb (get) and resource (property dossier). The description lists detailed data categories, distinguishing it from siblings like mortgage_rates or aviation_weather.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this when the user asks about: property research, real estate analysis, mortgage qualification, neighborhood data, school zoning, property due diligence.' It also mentions the cost and blockchain settlement, aiding decision-making. Lacks explicit 'when not to use', but siblings provide alternatives.

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