Calculate maximum home price you can afford

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description adds that it is pure local math with no network dependency and describes the output (max home price, binding constraint, PITI breakdown). No contradictions.

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 a single paragraph of three sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Nearly every sentence adds value, but a more structured listing of inputs and outputs would improve clarity.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description covers inputs and outputs but lacks details on defaults, edge cases, or precise DTI ratio specification (just 'standard 28/36'). Adequate but incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description lists several input parameters but does not explain their meaning or constraints (e.g., what front_end_dti and back_end_dti represent). It adds some context but insufficient for 10 parameters.

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 solves for maximum affordable home price using standard 28/36 DTI rule, lists inputs and outputs, and distinguishes from siblings by noting identical math to zillow-mcp and redfin-mcp.

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 for affordability calculation but does not explicitly state when to use it over the sibling tool homes_calculate_mortgage or what alternatives exist within the suite. It mentions identical math externally but no internal differentiation.

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