List Homechecker guides

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds value by noting it 'Returns metadata only', clarifying the content shape. However, it doesn't disclose whether includePillar alters return structure, pagination, or ordering. Bar is lower due to annotations; the metadata-only note adds modest context.

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?

A single, dense sentence that names all five filters and the metadata-only return. Efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose. Minor deduction for the trailing 'Returns metadata only' clause being behaviorally useful but slightly tangential to conciseness.

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?

Complexity is moderate (6 optional params, no required). No output schema exists, so the 'Returns metadata only' clarification helps. With read-only annotations and mostly-documented params, this is largely complete for a listing tool, though includePillar's meaning and search_guides differentiation would round it out.

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 67%, so most parameters already have descriptive examples in the schema (jurisdiction, buyingStage, era, propertyType). The description lists the filter dimensions, mirroring but not exceeding the schema. The includePillar parameter is undocumented in the schema and the description gives no meaning for it, leaving a 1-parameter gap. Baseline 3 is correct given high 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?

Specific verb+resource ('List...guide catalogue') clearly states what the tool does. The listed filter dimensions are explicit. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling 'search_guides' — both appear to return guide lists, so without an explicit differentiator the purpose is clear but sibling differentiation is missing.

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 states optional filtering by five dimensions, implying usage when a filtered catalogue is needed. But it does not clarify when to use list_guides vs search_guides vs get_guide, nor state any exclusions. No alternatives are named, so usage context is present but not differentiated.

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