Get Redfin property photo gallery

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, and the description reinforces these with 'Read-only; safe to call repeatedly.' It also adds behavioral details beyond annotations, such as the URL resolution via initialInfo, the return structure, and the edge case of count=0 for off-market listings. This provides a clear picture of what happens during the call.

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 two sentences with no redundant words. It front-loads the core purpose ('The full photo gallery') and then provides necessary details about output format, input options, and edge cases. 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 read-only photo retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: the exact return shape ({ property_id, listing_id, count, photos }), the contents of each photo entry, the two input methods, and a potential edge case (count=0). No critical information is missing.

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?

Although the schema already documents each parameter (100% coverage), the description adds significant semantic value by explaining the two mutually exclusive input groups (url OR property_id+listing_id) and that the latter skips the resolve step. This clarifies the relationship between parameters and helps the agent choose the correct combination.

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 exactly what the tool does: it retrieves the full photo gallery for a Redfin property, including every image in mediaBrowserInfo, with CDN URLs at multiple sizes, a thumbnail, and captions. This is a specific verb+resource that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like redfin_get_price_history or redfin_get_climate_risk.

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 provides clear guidance on the two invocation modes (url vs property_id+listing_id) and includes a caveat about off-market or stub listings returning count=0. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the purpose is unambiguous enough that an agent knows to use it for photo retrieval.

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