APIbase

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. It adds valuable context about data source ('RapidAPI / Realtor.com data') and return format ('cities, ZIP codes, and addresses with coordinates'), but omits operational details like rate limits, caching behavior, or authentication requirements that would be necessary for a 4-5 score.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste: first sentence front-loads purpose and return values, second provides usage context and data provenance. Every clause earns its place with no 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?

For a single-parameter tool without output schema, the description adequately compensates by detailing return types (cities, ZIP codes, coordinates) and geographic scope (US). Mentions external data source for reliability context. Slight gap in not describing error cases or empty result handling.

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 100% (query parameter fully documented with examples), establishing baseline of 3. The description implies the autocomplete nature but does not add syntax details, format constraints, or usage patterns beyond what the schema already 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?

Description provides specific verb ('Autocomplete') + resource ('location') + scope ('US real estate'), and distinguishes clearly from sibling tools like 'realestate.listings.for_sale' and 'realestate.property.details' by focusing on location suggestion rather than property data retrieval.

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 states when to use: 'Use to find valid city/state codes for property searches,' establishing the workflow relationship with other real estate tools. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance, but the positive directive provides clear context for selection.

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