list_propertiesList all properties of the authenticated user with key details such as surface area, acquisition price, ownership share, and rental type.
Liste tous les biens immobiliers de l'utilisateur authentifié avec leurs informations clés (surface, prix d'acquisition, quote-part, type de location).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the returned fields and that the data is scoped to the authenticated user, which is useful beyond the annotation. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but these are less critical for a zero-parameter list tool.
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 a single, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and the key output fields. It is appropriately sized, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary detail.
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 absence of an output schema, the description names specific key fields but does not exhaustively define the response structure. It covers essential information for an agent to decide whether to use this tool, though a bit more detail about the full property object would make it more complete.
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?
The tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% by default. The description correctly does not need to explain parameters, so the baseline score of 4 applies.
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 that the tool lists all real estate properties belonging to the authenticated user, with specific key information (surface, acquisition price, share, rental type). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_property (single property) and other list_* tools.
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 clear context: use this tool to retrieve all properties for the authenticated user. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, though the scope and purpose are clear enough to guide appropriate usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.