Get Zillow 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 adds substantial behavioral detail beyond annotations: the token-budget warning for 50+ photo properties, the conditional behavior of include_sources, and the exact return shape including optional keys.

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?

Four dense sentences with no filler: purpose, return contents, parameter rules, warning, return shape, and safety are all included. The most important scoping information is front-loaded, and every clause 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?

Even with no output schema, the description provides enough context for an agent to call the tool correctly: return object shape, optional fields, exclusivity constraint, include_sources behavior, token risk, and read-only safety. This is complete for a photo-fetching tool.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds critical semantics the schema omits: `zpid` and `url` are mutually exclusive despite both being optional in the schema, and `include_sources` carries a warning about token usage. It does not fully reconcile the schema's ambiguous 'on for properties with <~15 photos' default, which keeps this from a 5.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pairing: 'The full photo gallery for a Zillow property.' It explains exactly what is returned (hero URL, widest jpeg/webp variants, caption) and is clearly distinct from sibling tools like zillow_get_property or zillow_get_price_history.

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 invocation guidance: provide exactly one of `zpid` or `url`, and set `include_sources: true` only when the full source lists are needed. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state 'use this when you need photos rather than property details,' so it falls just short of full when-to-use-vs-alternatives guidance.

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