list_market_signals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context about high-signal opportunities and the intended workflow, but it does not disclose result ordering, return format, pagination, or default filtering behavior. 'Search' implies read-only, but operational details remain unspecified.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides usage guidance. Information is front-loaded and every phrase 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?

The tool is simple with 4 optional, well-documented parameters and no output schema. The description explains when to use it but does not describe the result format or ranking semantics. Given the low complexity, this is adequate but leaves room for more operational detail.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with meaningful descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, which is acceptable given full schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and a clear resource ('high-signal real estate investment opportunities') with concrete examples (teardowns, flips). It also differentiates from sibling tools by framing this as the entry point before diving into specific property details.

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 phrase 'Use this to find properties before diving into specific details' clearly indicates when to use the tool in a workflow. It does not explicitly name alternatives like get_property_intelligence, but the context implies a sequencing, and no exclusions are stated.

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