Get a homes.com market report for a location

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

Beyond the annotations (read-only, open-world, idempotent), the description adds important behavioral context: the sold page typically returns only ~40 listings, so the result is a sample-based summary rather than an exhaustive market index. It also discloses the return shape ('{ region, slug, sold_summary, sample_sold }'), which is especially valuable because no output schema is provided. There is no contradiction with the readOnlyHint.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the core action first, then the required parameter, then the return value, and finally the critical sampling caveat. Every sentence earns its place; there is no redundant filler or vague marketing language.

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 there is no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does, what it returns, how to pass the location, and a key behavioral limitation. The annotations cover safety and idempotency, and the schema covers parameter details. An agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema already documents both parameters and the view enum. The description adds value by giving concrete free-text examples for `location` ('Brooklyn, NY', '30311') and clarifying that it is the required input, which helps the agent format the parameter correctly.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Fetch') plus a concrete resource: recently-sold Homes.com listings for a city/ZIP/neighborhood, then states the derived output: count, median sale price, and average $/sqft. This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like homes_search_properties or homes_get_property, which serve different lookup 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?

The description gives clear context: use this tool when you need a market summary for a location, and it specifies the input as free-text city/ZIP/neighborhood. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the market-report framing is enough to guide tool selection among the sibling tools.

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