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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond them: results are sorted by comparable monthly price and each row carries a collection date and an openable link. It does not mention pagination behaviour or what the default limit is, so the added value is real but partial.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns before the filter options. Nothing is padded; the only slight loss is that the filter sentence is terse enough to leave parameter meaning ambiguous.

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 does reasonably well by describing row contents (collection date, link) and sort order. However, limit/pagination and the units of maxPerManad are missing, which an agent needs in order to call this four-parameter tool 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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden. It maps three of four parameters (maxPerManad, märke, fritext/sok) but gives no format details—no currency or period for maxPerManad, no expected values for märke—and the limit parameter is not mentioned at all.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource (list collected private-leasing campaigns from Swedish dealers/leasing companies) and states the ordering (comparable monthly price). It is clearly distinguishable from compare_cars, find_car and total_cost, though it does not explicitly say how it differs from them.

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?

"Filtrera på maxPerManad, märke eller fritext" implies when to apply filters, but there is no explicit guidance on when to pick this tool over compare_cars/find_car or on prerequisites. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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