Search Redfin listings

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint), the description discloses location resolution via autocomplete and gis API, the short-circuit behavior for addresses, the coverage field, result_cap_hit, ZIP error handling, and explicitly states 'Read-only; safe to call repeatedly.' No contradictions with 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?

The description is six sentences, each providing unique value. It front-loads the main purpose and progressively adds detail. Minor redundancy (e.g., 'Search Redfin listings' in title and description) could be trimmed, but overall well-structured.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers return fields, edge cases (cap hit, ZIP error, status limitation, coverage scenarios), and read-only safety. It is comprehensive for the tool's complexity.

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 50%; the description does not explicitly detail each parameter but mentions 'optional filters' and references price/beds filters for narrowing cap hits. It adds meaning by explaining the location parameter's resolution behavior and the status limitation. However, it could individually describe price_min/max, beds_min, baths_min to fully compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 states the tool's purpose: 'Search Redfin listings by location... and optional filters.' It specifies the verb (Search), resource (Redfin listings), and provides differentiation from siblings by noting location resolution via autocomplete and gis API, and that full addresses short-circuit.

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 explicit usage guidance, including when to use a full street address (short-circuits, returns single home), when to narrow filters (result_cap_hit signals ~350 cap), and limitations (v0.1.0 supports for_sale only, ZIP fallback errors). It implicitly differentiates from alternatives like redfin_get_by_address for profile_only coverage.

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