Search Hemnet sold listings (slutpriser)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it confirms read-only behavior and reveals what each result carries (final price, asking price, over/under-asking percentage). It does not contradict annotations.

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: what the tool does, what the results mean, and how to specify the location. It is front-loaded and every sentence contributes essential information without redundancy.

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 read-only search tool with no output schema, the description covers what matters most: the returned comps signal, the location input pattern, and the read-only nature. The 13 optional parameters are adequately documented in the input schema, so the description does not need to enumerate them.

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?

With 85% schema description coverage, the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds meaningful relational guidance: `location_ids` comes from hemnet_autocomplete_location and is an alternative to free-text `location`. It also adds the output semantics that make the parameters (price filters, location) relevant to valuation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and a well-defined resource ('SOLD property listings (slutpriser) on hemnet.se'), immediately differentiating it from active-listing search and singular listing lookup. The mention of achieved price, asking price, and over/under percentage clarifies the specific comps-focused purpose.

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?

The description clearly states how to specify the search scope: provide `location_ids` from hemnet_autocomplete_location or a free-text `location`. It does not explicitly say 'use hemnet_search_listings for active listings', but the SOLD designation and search semantics make the intended context clear.

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