get_random_property_records

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the tool returns a list of random property records, but doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like: what 'random' means (true randomness vs pseudo-random, seed behavior), whether results are reproducible, what permissions are required, rate limits, or error conditions. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 concise with two sentences, but the second sentence ('Returns a list of random property records.') is redundant with the first and adds no value. While brief, it wastes space on repetition rather than providing useful information about the tool's behavior or parameters.

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 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what makes this tool different from other property retrieval tools, doesn't document parameters, and provides minimal behavioral context. For a tool with this complexity and lack of structured documentation, the description should do much more.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 3 parameters (limit, property_type, state), the description provides no information about any parameters. It doesn't explain what the limit controls (number of records?), what property_type values are valid, or what state refers to (geographic state?). The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 'Get random property records' which is a clear verb+resource combination, but it's vague about what 'random' means in practice and doesn't distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'get_property_records' or 'get_property_listings'. The second sentence merely restates the first with 'Returns a list of...' adding no new information.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools for retrieving property data (get_property_records, get_property_listings, etc.), the description doesn't explain why someone would choose random sampling over filtered queries or what specific use cases this tool addresses.

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