imoveis_por_corretor

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the linking relationship but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what authentication is needed, pagination behavior, or error scenarios. The presence of pagination and filter parameters is not acknowledged.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the core idea. No wasted words. However, it is overly terse, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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 has 4 parameters (required corretor, optional campos, filtros, paginacao), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not mention how to use pagination, what filters are possible, or what the response format looks like. Sibling tools often have richer descriptions, making this one insufficient.

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?

With 50% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal value beyond the schema. It implies that 'corretor' identifies the agent, which is helpful since the schema lacks description for that required parameter. However, it does not clarify 'campos', 'filtros', or 'paginacao' beyond their schema descriptions.

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 (properties) and the linking criterion (by agent), but the verb is implicit. It does not specify whether the tool lists, searches, or returns properties. While it is not a tautology, it lacks action clarity and does not differentiate from siblings like imoveis_pesquisar or imoveis_por_agencia.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Many sibling tools exist (e.g., imoveis_pesquisar, imoveis_por_agencia), but the description provides no context on choosing this one. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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