List tenants

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine non-annotation context: each tenant maps to exactly one property, and propertyMissing signals a link to a deleted property, which helps an agent interpret results. It omits return shape and pagination, keeping it from a 5.

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 tight clauses, front-loaded with resource and scope before the data-model nuance and the fix path. Every sentence carries information, though the data-model clause is dense and slightly crowds out usage guidance.

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 one-optional-parameter list tool with no output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers scope, the filter, the property linkage, and the propertyMissing anomaly. It stops short of describing the returned list shape, but nothing essential for a correct call is missing.

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%, so the description must carry the meaning of the sole parameter, and 'optionally for one property' clearly explains that propertyId scopes the listing. Format details are absent, but the semantic role of the parameter is well conveyed.

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 the resource (tenants) and its scope (actual and prospect) plus the optional per-property filter, so an agent knows this returns a tenant collection rather than a single record like get_tenant. It never states the verb 'list' outright, leaning on the name/title for that, so it falls just short of a self-contained 5.

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?

It implies the propertyId filter is optional and routes link-fixing to update_tenant { propertyDetailsId }, which is useful. However it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to siblings like get_tenant or list_properties, leaving the core selection decision to inference.

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