Get listing detail

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'open-data enrichment,' hinting at external data sources and aggregation, but does not explicitly state read-only, potential latency, or any side effects. The description adds some context beyond a simple 'Get listing' but lacks detail on what the enrichment entails.

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, focused sentence with key information front-loaded ('Full detail plus full open-data enrichment') and no filler. It is highly concise and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse to fully prepare an agent. It does not specify what 'full detail' includes, how enrichment differs from sibling tools, or any potential limitations or prerequisites beyond the parameter identifiers. The scope is so vague that an agent might confuse it with get_property_intelligence or make incorrect assumptions about the response format.

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 schema already describes 'portal' with an example ('rightmove'), and the description merely repeats the parameter names without adding new meaning. The 'portalListingId' parameter remains undefined in both schema and description. With 50% schema coverage and no compensatory detail, the description adds minimal value beyond the parameter names.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'Full detail plus full open-data enrichment for one listing' with identification method 'by portal and portal listing id.' This distinguishes it from siblings like search_listings (which likely returns summaries) and get_property_intelligence (which targets property rather than listing).

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 use when you have a specific portal and portalListingId and need comprehensive data for that listing. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like search_listings or get_property_intelligence, and there are no stated exclusions or alternative references.

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