List nearby rental listings for a Compass property

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds real behavioral detail: it lifts city/state/zip from the homedetails page, searches the type-rental filter in the same locality, describes returned fields, and explains the empty-result contract with rentals: [] and preserved locality. The 'Read-only; safe to call repeatedly' statement is consistent with the annotations.

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?

Three dense, purposeful sentences: use case first, then mechanism and output, then empty-result behavior and safety. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler or repetition of schema content.

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 no output schema and three optional parameters, the description covers the core invocation path, output fields, and empty-result behavior well. It is missing an explicit statement that at least one of url or listing_id_sha should be supplied, and it does not address error cases, which prevents a perfect score.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning by explaining how the url parameter is processed (locality lifted from the homedetails page) and how the locality search is scoped. This complements the schema's per-parameter descriptions with useful behavioral context.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Surface nearby rental listings for a Compass property' and immediately adds the STR-viability use case. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like compass_compare_properties or compass_search_properties, which serve other comparison or search needs.

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?

It provides a clear context for when to use the tool: evaluating short-term-rental viability in vacation markets for a target Compass property. It does not explicitly name exclusions or alternative sibling tools for general property search, so it stops short of a 5.

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