get_apartment_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that the tool returns 'LLM analysis, price history, and photos,' but does not specify whether the operation is read-only, any authorization requirements, or potential side effects. This leaves significant ambiguity for a tool with no annotation support.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. The first sentence immediately states the purpose and parameter, and the second sentence lists the key return fields. No superfluous information is present.

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 simplicity (single parameter, output schema exists), the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the parameter format, and the scope of returned data. It does not mention limitations or error conditions, but these are less critical for a straightforward retrieval tool with a well-defined output schema.

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 schema provides no description for the 'source_id' parameter (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It does so effectively by providing a concrete example ('krisha:1013405508'), clarifying the expected format. However, it only gives one example, which may not cover all possible source_id patterns.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: get full details for a specific apartment by source_id. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('apartment details'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_price_history or search_apartments by focusing on comprehensive retrieval with all available fields.

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 implies usage when you have a source_id and need full details, but does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or mention alternative tools for more specific queries (e.g., get_price_history for price-only data). The example format aids understanding but lacks exclusionary guidance.

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