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

The readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false annotations are consistent with a pure local calculation, and the description confirms the breakdown returned. It doesn't disclose the jurisdiction whose rules apply, rounding behavior, or whether the given price is treated as net or gross, which matter for interpreting results.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource and the returned components in one clause. Every element earns its place; no filler or 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 usefully enumerates the cost components returned. However, for a domain calculation tool it omits the governing jurisdiction and how the two parameters change the result, leaving real ambiguity about scope and expected output values.

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 0%, so the schema documents neither parameter. The description partially compensates by linking the reduced VAT rate to a 'main home', which implicitly maps to purpose=home, but it never names the purpose or price_eur parameter, nor explains the invest/home enum semantics or currency handling.

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 names a specific computation and enumerates its outputs: VAT, legal fees, registration, and total, on top of a given property price. It is clearly different from lookup siblings like get_project or place_info, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from budget_calculator, the closest sibling.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement, and no mention of budget_calculator as an alternative. Usage is implied by the phrasing 'what a buyer pays on top of a given property price' – an agent can infer a buyer-side transaction-cost calculation, but must reason about routing itself.

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