get_results

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, if it validates conditions, requires active session, or has side effects. The term 'verification result' suggests some checking but is not explained. This is a significant gap for a tool likely in a multi-step workflow.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structure and front-loading of essential usage context. It lists return fields but does not prioritize critical information like usage or prerequisites. It feels under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 the tool's complexity (3 parameters, output schema, likely part of a session-based workflow), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how it fits with sibling tools like create_search_session or set_filter_range, does not mention session lifecycle, and provides no context on when results are final or how verification works. An agent cannot reliably use this 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about any of the three parameters (session_id, limit, expected_filters). An agent would not know what session_id refers to, what limit controls, or how expected_filters affects the result. The description does not compensate for the lack of schema coverage.

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 it returns house name, URL, current conditions, and final condition verification results, which gives a specific verb and resource (retrieve results). However, it doesn't clearly differentiate from siblings like get_listing_detail or get_filter_schema, and the phrasing is somewhat ambiguous about what 'final condition verification' means.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention session context, prerequisites like having an active session, or whether it should be called after setting filters. An agent would have no idea when to invoke it.

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