get_property_listings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Get property listings') without details on permissions, rate limits, pagination, or response format. For a read operation with multiple parameters, this leaves critical behavioral traits unspecified, though it doesn't contradict any annotations.

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, straightforward sentence with no wasted words, making it appropriately concise. However, it lacks front-loading of critical details (e.g., parameter context or sibling differentiation), which slightly reduces its effectiveness despite the brevity.

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 complexity (5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the tool's scope relative to siblings, parameter usage, or expected output, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly in this context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It mentions 'specific area,' which loosely relates to the required 'zip_code' parameter, but doesn't cover other parameters like 'property_type,' 'min_price,' 'max_price,' or 'bedrooms.' This adds minimal value beyond the schema, failing to address the coverage gap adequately.

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 states the tool's purpose as 'Get property listings for a specific area,' which includes a verb ('Get') and resource ('property listings') with some scope ('specific area'). However, it's vague about what 'specific area' means (e.g., zip code, city) and doesn't distinguish it from siblings like 'get_sale_listings' or 'get_rental_listings,' leaving ambiguity in its exact function.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_sale_listings' and 'get_rental_listings,' the description lacks context on whether this tool covers both sale and rental listings, filters by property type, or serves as a general-purpose query, making it unclear how to choose among similar tools.

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