UK Property Data

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying the return format (JSON with metadata), distinguishing between static resources (with 'uri') and templates (with 'uri_template' and placeholders), which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by essential details about the return format. Every sentence earns its place by providing critical information without redundancy, making it highly 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 tool has 0 parameters, annotations covering safety, and an output schema (implied by context signals), the description is complete. It effectively explains what the tool does and the structure of returned data, compensating for any potential gaps in the output schema.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on output semantics, explaining the structure of returned data, which adds meaningful context beyond the schema.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('all available resources and resource templates'), making the purpose specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'read_resource' by emphasizing comprehensive listing rather than reading individual resources.

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 implies usage for retrieving metadata about resources and templates, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'read_resource' or other search tools. No guidance is provided on exclusions or specific contexts for preferring this tool.

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