search_listings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions stability and parameter defaults but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or response structure. Some transparency is present in parameter behavior (e.g., max_pages).

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 well-structured with a bold title, explanatory text, and a parameter list. It is front-loaded with purpose. Slightly verbose due to repeated explanations of code formats, but overall efficient.

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 parameter count of 7 and 2 required parameters, the description covers input semantics well. It does not mention output schema (which exists) or return value details, but that is acceptable. It also explains pagination via max_pages. Missing a note on output structure or error handling.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing detailed explanations for all 7 parameters, including examples, allowed values (trade types, property types), defaults, and the meaning of delta and max_pages. This is excellent coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'coordinate-based listing search (most stable method)'. It distinguishes itself from get_region_info (used as a prerequisite) but does not explicitly differentiate from other siblings like get_articles or get_complex_detail.

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?

The description advises using get_region_info first to verify coordinates and explains trade/property type codes. It provides context for when to use (coordinate-based search) but does not specify when not to use or mention alternative tools.

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