Get homes.com property history (DEPRECATED — use homes_get_history)

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), and the description goes beyond them by disclosing lifecycle risk (removal in a future major version) and non-obvious output semantics: which fields appear only on PriceChange rows and that list_to_sale_pct carries homes.com's 'List to Sale' figure elsewhere, not a price change. It doesn't cover pagination or payload size limits, which keeps it short of 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the deprecation and the routing decision, then the payload semantics. The closing sentence is dense, but every clause carries meaning an agent needs; no filler or restated title.

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?

For a one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description supplies what structure alone cannot: the three timeline collections, the normalized event shape, and the field-semantics trap. Migration path and return contract are both covered, so an agent has what it needs to call and interpret it.

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?

Only one parameter (url) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already defines it as a property detail URL or path. The description adds no format, normalization, or validation detail for that parameter and only references url in the context of a sibling's signature, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get homes.com property history') and immediately names the exact relationships: three timelines (listing_events, ownership_events, lien_events) in one call. The deprecation prefix and named successors (homes_get_history, homes_get_property) let an agent distinguish it from siblings without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to alternatives with the selecting condition: prefer homes_get_history (combined timelines + tax) or homes_get_property with include_price_history: true, framed as 'same data, fewer round trips.' It also flags the removal horizon, which is actionable migration guidance.

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