get-price-per-meter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It states the output is statistics but does not disclose whether filters are required, how aggregation works, or what the time series structure looks like. This leaves the agent uncertain about invocation prerequisites.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and output, and the second sentence provides a relevant use case. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

With 77 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain the response structure, whether any location or date filters are required, or how time series data is grouped. Additional context about the aggregated nature and expected response format is needed.

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 already provides descriptions for all 77 parameters, so the description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline applies; the description only generically refers to 'filters' without highlighting which parameters are most relevant for price-per-meter analysis.

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 'Get' and identifies the exact resource 'price per m² statistics' with output types (average, median, time series). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like search-properties or get-property by focusing on aggregated statistics.

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 a use case ('market analysis and property valuation') but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search-properties. It implies overlap by mentioning 'filters' but does not clarify the key distinction between aggregate stats and individual listings.

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