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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It reveals that this is a PUT /api/save mutation and recommends previewing first, but it omits permissions, irreversibility, spending effects, selling consequences, and failure behavior.

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 front-loaded and has no wasted words. Its brevity is a weakness for such a complex tool, but the structure itself is clean and efficient.

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 an eight-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not cover parameter formats, side effects, permissions, or how buy/sell/move/stow operations interact.

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 only 25%, and the description does not explain the JSON structures, required combinations, max spend behavior, or how the eight parameters map to the listed operations. It names operation categories but leaves most parameter semantics undocumented.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Apply home changes') and enumerates the supported operations (add/buy, layout, move, stow, sell). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like propose_home_design or preview_home_design, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It gives a concrete prerequisite: preview with emit_display using pipeline_name apply_home_design first. However, it does not address when to use this instead of propose_home_design or preview_home_design, and it provides no exclusions.

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