Get the signed-in user's saved searches on homes.com

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

Beyond the annotations' readOnly and idempotent hints, the description discloses that the tool scrapes the saved-searches page, requires an authenticated browser session, throws a specific error when not signed in, and that missing name/filters fields are a scraping artifact rather than an absence of data. This goes well beyond the structured metadata.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds the endpoint, return shape, authentication caveat, missing-field semantics, and safety note. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description is complete: it provides the return format, the authentication prerequisite, the error case, the caveat about DOM scraping, and the fact that it can be called repeatedly. The annotations already supply safety hints, and the description fills in all agent-relevant behavior.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the input schema has nothing to document. The description adds valuable context by specifying the return shape, `{ count, searches: [{ name?, url, filters? }] }`, but this is output information rather than parameter explanation; the zero-parameter baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb and resource: it 'gets the signed-in user's saved searches on homes.com' and specifies the exact endpoint scraped. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like homes_get_saved_homes, which handles saved homes rather than saved searches.

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 for use: it requires the user to be signed into homes.com in their browser tab dove altrimenti it throws SessionNotAuthenticatedError, and it is safe to call repeatedly. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, so it stops short of full guidance.

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