list_units

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses pagination and inclusion of current tenants, but lacks details on search behavior (exact match vs fuzzy), sorting, rate limits, or potential empty results. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded, no fluff. Each sentence adds value: first states purpose, second adds key features (address search, pagination, current tenants).

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?

Tool complexity is low with 3 optional params and no output schema. The description mentions 'including current tenants' but does not specify output structure (e.g., fields returned, pagination metadata like total count). Adequate for a basic list but leaves some gaps.

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 baseline is 3. The description only repeats schema info ('Supports address search' matches 'search by address'; 'Returns paginated results' matches page/pageSize). No new meaning added.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('property units'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create_unit' and 'list_tenants'. It states scope ('for the account') and mentions key features.

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 (e.g., 'get_unit' for a single unit, or 'list_tenants' for tenants). It does not provide when-not-to-use or contextual prerequisites.

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