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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the bar is lower. The description adds behavioral context by stating the tool returns annual and monthly tax amounts, a national rank, and a comparison to the national average, and it discloses the limitation of using average effective rates.

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 two sentences that front-load the core function and then add output details plus an alternative pointer without any filler. Every clause is informative and earns its place.

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 compensates by naming what is returned (annual/monthly totals, state rank, comparison to national average). It also covers an alternative for deeper mechanics, making it self-sufficient for a simple read-only calculator with good annotations.

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%, with clear definitions for state ('Full US state name') and homePrice ('Home value in US dollars'). The description mentions 'using a state's average effective rate' but adds no parameter-level details beyond the schema, 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?

The description opens with 'Annual and monthly property tax for a home, using a state's average effective rate,' clearly specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It also mentions additional outputs (national rank, comparison to average) that differentiate it from sibling calculators like calculate_mortgage or estimate_closing_costs.

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 explicitly directs users who need the mechanics behind the number—assessment basis, caps, exemptions, appeal deadlines—to use get_state_mortgage_rules, naming an alternative. This clearly implies when to use this tool (quick estimate using average effective rates) and when not to.

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