domain_search_listings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Search', implying read-only, but lacks disclosure on authentication (api_key parameter), pagination (pageSize), error handling, or data volume. Behavioral traits are underspecified.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, extreme conciseness sacrifices useful context for a tool with 10 parameters. Slightly better balance could be struck.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 10 parameters, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what the tool returns (list vs details), how filters interact, or whether location is required. The agent lacks context 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?

Schema description coverage is only 10% (only listingType has a description). The tool description adds no parameter meaning beyond 'search Australian property listings'. Parameters like suburb, state, postcode have no explanatory context, and price/room filters are undeclared.

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 'Search Australian property listings on Domain' uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Australian property listings'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'domain_get_property' (single property details) and 'domain_suburb_stats' (suburb statistics). The geographic scope is explicit.

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 provides no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives or prerequisites (e.g., requiring location parameters). The agent must infer usage from the name and schema alone.

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