Get Zillow tax history for a property

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint) already declare safe read behavior. The description adds valuable context: data source (homedetails page), the possibility of missing history with a distinguishing note, and the omission of history for certain listings. 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?

Three sentences with no wasted words: first defines output, second provides context and utility, third covers an edge case. Information is front-loaded and 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description fully explains the return structure (tax paid, assessed value, change rates) and documents edge-case behavior (empty events with a note). This is sufficient for a read-only data retrieval 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?

Parameter schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning to the 'url' or 'zpid' parameters beyond what the schema already provides. The description focuses on output rather than input semantics.

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 retrieves year-by-year property-tax records including tax paid, assessed value, and year-over-year change rates, distinguishing it from siblings like price or Zestimate history. The specific verb 'get' is implied, and the resource (tax history) is unambiguous.

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 explains when to use the tool (spotting reassessment jumps, comparing tax burdens) and describes an important edge case (non-Showcase listings returning empty events with a note). However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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