get_listing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the HTTP method (GET), that resources are included, and that sensitive fields like wifiPassword, door codes, and invoicing contacts are stripped. It does not mention auth, error behavior, or rate limits, but for a simple read operation it is reasonably transparent.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. The core action and endpoint are front-loaded, followed by useful inclusion and exclusion details. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by listing what is included and what is stripped, giving the agent a practical picture of the response. It does not explicitly describe the full return structure or error handling, but for a single-parameter read endpoint, the coverage is strong.

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. It maps the path parameter {id} to the listingId parameter via the endpoint example, but it does not explicitly define what listingId means beyond its name and path usage. This adds some meaning but leaves the agent to infer the rest from the parameter name.

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 a specific verb ('Retrieve'), a specific resource ('one listing'), and the exact endpoint. It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like list_listings by emphasizing 'one listing' versus a list operation.

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 the tool is used when you need a single listing by ID, and the endpoint path makes that clear. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over list_listings or other sibling tools, nor does it provide exclusion criteria.

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