Get my saved (favorited) Redfin homes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, which the description echoes. Beyond that, it adds the auth prerequisite ('Requires the user to be signed in') and summarizes the returned fields, which is useful behavioral context not present in the annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: what the tool returns, what fields are included, and the auth/safety profile. No filler or redundant restatement; the most important scoping information comes first.

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 simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it states the resource, return fields, authentication requirement, and safety. There are no obvious gaps that would prevent an agent from invoking it 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 description coverage is 100%, and the single 'view' parameter already has a detailed explanation of compact vs. full responses. The tool description adds no additional meaning about this parameter, so the baseline score of 3 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 clearly identifies the resource (the signed-in user's favorited homes on redfin.com) and the action (returns them). The phrase 'favorited homes' distinguishes this from sibling tools like redfin_get_saved_searches, and the listed return fields make the tool's scope concrete.

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: this is for the signed-in user's own saved homes and requires authentication. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the scope is specific enough that an agent can route appropriately.

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