Person's roles

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description goes beyond them by disclosing that addresses are reduced to town/county/country by default and that the endpoint returns a plain list without a total, so paging terminates at a short page. That paging quirk is real behavioral context an agent could not derive from structured fields.

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?

Purpose and role contents are front-loaded, followed by the address and paging caveats. The sentences are dense and slightly overpacked, but every clause carries information rather than filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-shape burden and does so: it names the role fields, the default vs full address, and the paging termination behavior. An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the response.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning by explaining the default address-reduction behavior tied to include_contact_details and the pagination semantics (no total; short page ends paging) that contextualize page/max_results.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('the properties a person is selling, letting, buying or renting') and enumerates the returned role fields: type, property ID, headline price, offer/viewing counts, accepted offer price. It also distinguishes itself from the get_property sibling for full-address lookups, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Gives a clear condition for include_contact_details (full number/street/postcode/coordinates) and names get_property by ID as the alternative source for the full address. It does not state when to prefer this tool over get_offer/list_offers for offer data, but the primary selection context is covered.

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