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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful source and data-scope context (INE, median sale price, buyer-origin and new-vs-existing splits), but it does not describe pagination, rate limits, or response behavior beyond what the output schema likely covers.

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 short and front-loads the key purpose and source. The bilingual repetition is redundant for an English-reading agent but likely intentional for multilingual use, which slightly lowers the score from a perfect 5.

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?

For a one-optional-parameter read-only statistical tool with an output schema and rich annotations, the description provides complete contextual framing: source, metric, geographic scope, and available data splits. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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?

The single parameter 'zona' has 100% schema description coverage, including examples and the empty-string overview behavior. The description lists some regions but adds no meaningful syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 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 states a specific verb and resource: consulting official median sale price per m² of homes sold from Statistics Portugal (INE). It lists the covered regions and data splits, allowing an agent to distinguish it from property listing or cost-calculation siblings without opening schemas.

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 implied by the stated purpose (retrieving official market price statistics), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when not to use it, and no named alternatives among siblings like pesquisar_imoveis or calcular_custos_compra.

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