Mass-luminosity relationship is proportional to the 4th power, so I'd expect a mass 1.2 times that of the Sun for 2.19 times the luminosity, but that's close enough for demiurgical work. [Habitable zone] should be proportional to the light received, which decreases by inverse square, so for 2.19 times the light I'd expect something centered on 1.5 AU. Still, the "habitable zone" is a concept I don't actually believe in - there are habitable zones for specific planets, not habitable zones of space in the abstract - and in some formulations Earth is practically on the inner edge of a zone that extends out almost to Mars. I'd say it's a fair assertion. Star temperature and luminosity are a bit loosely related; this doesn't seem implausible to me. The gravity, and radius look like they work out. The planet is a little less dense than Earth despite its large size, which hints a bit at light elements - potentially deep oceans or something stranger like a massive abundance of carbon.
With a 2.25-year year, and eccentricity quite high by our standards. The apoapsis/periapsis ratio is 1.1/0.9, which is squared to determine illumination, so the planet receives 1.49 times more light in "summer" (orbitally defined) rather than "winter". Now insolation on Earth can vary quite substantially also - see maps for a practical view of it. This tells me that if your axial tilt happens to line up with the semimajor axis of your ellipse, weather in one hemisphere of the planet might be fairly moderate (still perhaps more extreme than Earth), while on the other we are definitely talking about deep freeze and burning heat. I'll call the freeze-and-burn hemisphere "south" in honor of Earth's much smaller correlation, but it's a 50-50 chance.
The mass of your planet makes it harder for it to lose its primary atmosphere, but that depends on facts not in evidence, such as the flare history of the star and the orbital migration of the planet, not to mention whether it gets hit by Theia. It could be a Neptune but it might be a super-Earth, and I don't think any facts we know can kibosh either alternative. I'm going to suppose that it comes out with an Earthlike atmosphere by favorable chance. There is certainly a possibility of some more interesting circulation patterns, with carbon dioxide freezing out of the atmosphere in the southern hemisphere for an Earth year or so each orbit. (This can happen in Antarctica, but only conceptually, because there is very little CO2 in the atmosphere, much like it doesn't really snow on a cold dry day. Your atmosphere gets much colder, and it might have more CO2 based on that low density and the difficulty of stripping the heavy atoms) This might affect plant growth and lead to evolution of CO2 reservoirs that go a little beyond crassulacean acid metabolism! I suppose the freezing and thawing of CO2 might even make the southern seasons a little more extreme. Still, even the night side should be habitable in spots due to volcanic hot springs - it might have a bit less radioactive material internally, but it still has a much larger internal store of heat. (The vulcanism would depend on chemical particulars of the planet's crust and plate tectonics...)
My overall expectation is that intelligent lifeforms ought to be able to live on such a planet, if we assume it developed in a way they can. There are many free parameters left to fudge to try to make things work out the way you want, and of course, nobody has ever seen a planet like this as anything but a speck of light.
