Search listings

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: deduplication across portals, enrichment with open data (last-sold price, EPC floor area, etc.), and a coverage flag to prevent silent truncation. This goes beyond the basic purpose and provides significant transparency for an agent.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with 'Primary tool' to immediately signal importance. Each sentence adds new information: scope, enrichment, coverage flag. No filler or redundant wording.

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 tool's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides a good high-level overview but lacks essential details like pagination limits, how to interpret the coverage flag, and how the enrichment data is returned. It is not fully complete for an agent to invoke it confidently without additional 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 coverage is only 20% (location and transactionType have descriptions), and the tool description does not add meaning for the remaining 8 parameters. It mentions enrichment fields but doesn't connect them to input parameters, so the agent cannot infer how to control result details from the description.

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 the tool performs a federated live search across all major portals (Rightmove, Zoopla, OnTheMarket), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like resolve_location, get_listing, and market_stats. The verb 'search' and resource 'listings' are specific and unambiguous.

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 calls it the 'Primary tool' for searching listings, implying it should be the default choice. It does not explicitly compare with alternatives like commute_search or market_stats, but the primacy signal provides clear context. However, it lacks explicit exclusion guidelines.

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