get_comparables

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses use of PostGIS spatial query, a date filter (sold or first-listing in past year), and count limits, which are valuable behavioral traits. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but the nature of the tool implies it.

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: first states the purpose, second explains the use case, third provides technical implementation details. It is front-loaded with the essential action and concise without redundancy.

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 has only 2 parameters, an output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core functionality, methodology, and key constraints. It lacks mention of error handling or authentication, but for a query tool, it is sufficiently complete.

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 input schema already describes the parameters well (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining that 'count' refers to the number of closest properties and that results include properties with a sold date or first-listing date within the past year, beyond what schema provides.

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 'Find comparable recently-sold properties near a subject property' with a specific verb and resource, and the context of valuation work. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_property_sales', which might serve a similar purpose, so it misses a direct distinction.

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 provides context for when to use the tool ('Useful for valuation work') but does not include explicit when-not-to-use instructions or mention alternatives among siblings. The guidance is implied but not comprehensive.

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