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 genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: which rate types are returned, that state and national averages are included, and that the payload carries Datenstand and Quelle, which matters for a tax figure that changes over time.

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?

Front-loaded with the core resource and scope, followed by the data payload and a compact formula; the German/English pairing is slightly redundant but justified for a German-domain tool. No filler sentences.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden, and it does so: it enumerates the rate types, the averages, and the metadata (data date, source). For a one-parameter lookup tool this is complete.

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 single parameter is already documented (name or slug from search_places). The description adds the meaning of the returned Hebesatz and its formula but nothing new about the municipality parameter itself, 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 names a precise resource (Grundsteuer-Hebesätze for every German municipality, types B and A) plus the accompanying data (state/national averages, data date, source) and even the computation formula. It is unambiguous what the tool returns, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with siblings like get_city_costs or search_places.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this when it needs a municipality's property tax multiplier. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or routing to an alternative tool, so the agent must reason from the purpose alone.

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