property_sandbox_addresses

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

No annotations are present, but the description discloses key behavioral traits: lookups never count toward quota, there are twelve real addresses covering all eight states, and it works on any Property Intelligence key. This goes beyond a basic 'list' description and gives useful context about the free nature and scope.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds essential details about the addresses and how to use them, with no wasted words.

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 that there is an output schema and no parameters, the description fully covers the tool's purpose, usage, and relevant caveats (free, quota-free, real addresses). It also correctly positions the tool relative to property_intelligence, making it complete for its scope.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description provides sufficient context without needing to describe any inputs.

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 'List sandbox addresses whose lookups never count toward your quota,' which identifies the specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings by explaining that these addresses are for use with property_intelligence to evaluate live responses for free.

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 explicitly tells the user to use these addresses with property_intelligence for free testing, providing clear context for when to use this tool. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the singular use case is well defined.

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