Find a Fastighetsbenchmark parameter

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only' and 'never writes'. It adds extra context beyond annotations by explaining what the tool returns and how to interpret dataType for CompDatum values. No contradiction with 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?

The description is efficient, front-loading the read-only nature and purpose, then providing a concrete usage example. Every sentence adds value, and it is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the tool's purpose, relationship to another tool, and how to interpret output data types. It is complete for an AI agent to decide when and how to use it.

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 baseline is 3. The description references nameContains and group but does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It does not explain each parameter, but the schema already covers that.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: discovering real-estate benchmark parameters by name fragment or group, and returning specific fields (code, name, dataType, enumValues). It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly linking to the consumer tool fastighetsbenchmark_get_comp_timeseries.

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 gives explicit usage context: 'Use this to resolve the parameterCode you pass to fastighetsbenchmark_get_comp_timeseries'. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the downstream usage is clearly stated, which is strong guidance.

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