Look up RERA-registered Dubai brokers by name or license number to verify their registration status.
Look up RERA-registered Dubai brokers.
Tier 1 tool, requires Dubai Pulse credentials.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | Broker name substring. | |
| limit | No | Max records. | |
| license_number | No | Broker license number. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds a genuinely useful operational fact beyond the annotations: Dubai Pulse credentials are required before invoking. It does not mention pagination behavior for the default limit of 50.
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 short lines, front-loaded with the purpose followed by the credential prerequisite; nothing is padded. The phrase 'Tier 1 tool' is internal jargon that carries little meaning for an agent.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the schema fully documents inputs. What the agent gets is purpose plus a hard credential gate, which is sufficient to decide whether to call it; only search-behavior detail is thin.
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 all three parameters (name substring, license_number, limit) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no filtering semantics, such as whether filters combine or whether name is a substring match.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: looking up RERA-registered Dubai brokers, which is clearly distinct from siblings like dld_search_transactions and dld_search_rent_contracts. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with any sibling or clarify the broker-registry scope versus transaction data.
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 prerequisite ('requires Dubai Pulse credentials') gives an actionable gating condition, but there is no statement of when to use this over related DLD/RERA tools, nor any exclusion criteria. Usage is only implied by the tool's domain.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.