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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world corpus). The description adds genuinely new behavioral detail beyond them: the response is a self-contained short answer with a check date and URL, which tells the agent what it will receive and that answers carry a freshness marker.

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 sentence with the country scope front-loaded ("AUSTRALIA.") followed by what is found and what is returned. No filler, though the enumeration of covered topics makes it denser than necessary.

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 describing the return payload (short answer, check date, URL), and annotations supply the safety/closed-world context. For a one-parameter lookup tool, an agent has everything needed to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single query parameter is already documented with examples, so the schema carries the load. The description reinforces that the input can be a question or keywords, but adds no syntax, format, or matching-behavior detail beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Finds the Payotte guide") plus the exact domain covered (buying, financing, selling, renting, owning a home in Australia). It is clearly separable from guide_in/guide_uk by the country scope, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

It implies the use case — answering a home-related question for Australia — but offers no when-to-use/when-not guidance, no mention of alternatives like purchase_duty_au or house_prices_au, and no statement of what happens when no guide matches.

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