Add a property

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

Annotations already establish readOnly=false, destructive=false and openWorld=false, so the description's added value is what it discloses beyond that: only name is required, type silently defaults to home, the address is optional and only feeds a map picture, and the call returns the new property with its id. It stops short of noting validation failures or duplicate-name behavior, which keeps it off 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?

Four short sentences, each doing distinct work: identity, minimum viable call, prerequisite check, sibling hand-off, and return shape. The most decision-relevant constraints (only name required, check list_locations first) are placed early with no 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 usefully states the return value ('the new property with its id'), and the 10-parameter surface is covered by a fully documented schema. Complete enough to call correctly; the only missing piece is how duplicates or invalid inputs surface as errors.

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 schema already documents all ten fields, including the type default and the map-picture note on street. The description restates the required/default facts rather than adding new semantics such as valueCents units or yearBuilt bounds. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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?

A specific verb ('Adds') plus a precisely scoped resource ('a property — a home, vacation home, rental, storage unit or vehicle'), plus a positional framing ('the top level of where things are kept') that separates it from create_location, which handles rooms/closets/shelves inside it. An agent can distinguish it from every sibling without opening a 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: check list_locations first to avoid duplicates, and use create_location next for the contents inside the property. It names the alternatives and the ordering condition, which is exactly the when/when-not guidance a creation tool needs.

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