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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context by disclosing the returned fields (size in m2, model page link, price 'where available'), which is valuable since there is no output schema and flags that price may be absent.

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 tight sentences with the resource scope front-loaded and the filter capability following. Minor redundancy in re-listing the four type values that already appear as the schema enum.

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 zero-required-param read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned and how to filter it. Only pagination/result-count behavior is unaddressed, a minor omission given the tool's simplicity.

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% and all three parameters are documented in the schema, including the enum values. The description restates the same filter concepts (type, size range) without adding syntax, units, or boundary behavior beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('List Husverket's house models') and enumerates the four model types it covers, so the agent knows exactly what domain this returns. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling search_husverket, which is the only gap.

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 closing sentence 'Filter by type and/or size range' gives implied usage for the two filter axes, but there is no guidance on when to choose this over search_husverket or the other sibling listing tools, and no prerequisites are stated.

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