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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the key behavioral payload absent from annotations: the exact result quantities and their units (kWh/a, kWh/month, kWh/day), which is important since there is no output schema.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the conversion, followed by the concrete outputs. No filler; the result list is dense but earns its place given there is no output schema.

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 takes on returning the result shape and units, which it does thoroughly. A simple read-only calculation tool with fully described parameters is adequately covered; only the usage decision rule is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents region, heizlast_kw, and volllaststunden with ranges and enum meaning. The description only gestures at 'Heizlast und Volllaststunden' without adding format or constraint detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline 3.

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: converting heating load (kW) into energy (kWh) over year/month/day periods. The domain is unambiguous. It cannot differentiate from siblings because siblings are opaque bot_XXX identifiers, so sibling-level clarity is not achievable here.

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 implies usage (calculating annual/monthly/daily energy from Heizlast and full-load hours) and mentions a formula and example, but never says when to pick this tool over alternatives or what preconditions apply. Usage must be inferred.

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