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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, which the description does not contradict. The description adds detailed behavioral context about special rules (30% for household supplies, 50% for mixed-use vehicle, 5% global provision) that go beyond schema fields.

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 a single concise paragraph. It front-loads the core purpose, then efficiently enumerates key special rules with specific percentages. No extraneous words or repetition.

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 14 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the calculation logic well. It explains how inputs relate to deduction limits. However, it does not describe the output format (likely a single deduction amount).

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?

All 14 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description adds interaction rules (e.g., pct_vivienda_afecta only used with vivienda_habitual, vehiculo_uso_exclusivo flag changes deductibility), enhancing understanding beyond individual parameter docs.

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 specifies the tool calculates deductible expenses for Spanish self-employed in direct estimation (normal or simplified). It lists specific rules (supplies, vehicle, insurance, amortization) and differentiates from siblings like calcular_cuota_autonomo or calcular_modelo_130.

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 implies usage for annual deductible expense calculation in IRPF but does not explicitly state when to use this versus other similar tools (e.g., calcular_modelo_130 for quarterly). No when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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