get_villa_rent

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

No annotations provided, but description covers behavior: returns records filtered by region and month, includes error/message field for failures. Missing details on rate limits or authentication, but still transparent about core functionality and return structure.

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?

Well-structured with 'Args' and 'Returns' sections, front-loaded with purpose statement. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words. Appropriate length for complexity.

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?

Output schema exists and description lists return fields in detail. Covers error handling. Given 3 parameters and sibling context, description is fully complete for correct tool selection and invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, so description provides full burden. It explains region_code as '5-digit legal district code (returned by get_region_code)', year_month as YYYYMM format with suggestion to use get_current_year_month, and num_of_rows with default 100. Adds crucial meaning beyond 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?

Description states specific verb+resource: 'Return row-house and multi-family lease/rent records for a region and month.' Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_apartment_rent and get_officetel_rent by specifying property type and providing Korean keywords.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use alongside get_villa_trades to compute villa jeonse ratio and evaluate rental investment yield.' This gives clear context for when to use and mentions a companion tool. Includes Korean keywords to clarify property scope.

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