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 behavioral context annotations cannot express: prices are list prices in SGD with GST included, and this is a discovery step rather than a quoter. It stops short of describing pagination or caching, but for a zero-arg catalog read that is minor.

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?

One dense sentence describing contents followed by a short routing instruction. Front-loaded with the resource and geography, with zero filler and no repetition of the title.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of saying what comes back, and it does: services, per-service options, and list prices with tax treatment. It also positions the tool in the workflow relative to get_quote, which is everything an agent needs to call a zero-argument read correctly.

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 tool takes no parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. Schema coverage is 100% and there is nothing parameter-wise for the description to explain or compensate for.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List what HomeMaster sells in Singapore') and enumerates the concrete content returned (cleaning visit lengths/frequency, aircon jobs/unit counts, list prices in SGD with GST). The scope words 'Singapore' and 'list prices' separate it cleanly from get_quote's exact-price-with-offers output.

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 directs sequencing ('Call this first when you need the options') and names the alternative and the condition that selects it ('For an exact price with offers, use get_quote'). Nothing is left for the agent to infer.

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