get_top_apartments

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

With no annotations, the description carries full weight. It discloses that only analyzed apartments are returned and that results are sorted by LLM score. However, it does not mention read-only nature, pagination, or any side effects, leaving gaps for a mutation-free tool.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Each sentence adds value, but the third sentence about filtering is slightly redundant with the second. No wasted words overall.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema present, the description covers most but not all essential aspects. Missing explanation for 'limit' and sorting direction. Adequate for basic use but lacks full detail for confident tool selection.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains three parameters (city, rooms, price_max) but misses the 'limit' parameter, and does not clarify the 'rooms' array's meaning (e.g., number of bedrooms) or price_max semantics. Adds some value but incomplete.

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 'Get top-rated apartments sorted by LLM score', specifying the verb, resource, and sorting criterion. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_new_apartments' and 'search_apartments' by focusing on top-rated analyzed apartments.

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 provides clear context for when to use (to get highest-scored apartments) and mentions optional filters (city, rooms, price). However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or direct comparison to sibling tools.

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