Score Multifamily Deal (Quick)

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds value by specifying the return value (DFP Score and key metrics) and the 'quick' performance characteristic, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and return value, followed by usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

The description communicates what the tool does, when to use it, and what it returns. The phrase 'key metrics' is somewhat vague, but the schema and annotations fill in the rest. For a quick-screening tool, this is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the input schema, so coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('score'), resource ('multifamily deal'), and scale ('DFP 0-100'), and distinguishes itself from full analysis, which maps to the sibling analyze_deal. The mention of 'key metrics' adds scope, making it clear what the tool does.

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 explicitly says 'use this for quick screening' and notes it is 'faster than full analysis', which implies an alternative for deeper evaluation. The sibling tools are not named directly, but the context signals list them, so an agent can infer when to choose this tool over analyze_deal.

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