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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the informational nature (not legal advice) and that each item cites sources with verification dates. However, it does not mention rate limits, authentication requirements, or data freshness guarantees.

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?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. The first sentence states the core functionality with examples, and the second adds source citation and disclaimer. No unnecessary words.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description provides moderate context: it mentions each item cites official sources and verification dates. However, it does not describe the return format or behavior when no filters are applied, which would be helpful for agent usage.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains each parameter's meaning. The description adds only the phrase 'Optionally filter by', which adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'recurring US compliance / tax-filing obligations' with specific examples like FinCEN BOI, IRS Form 5472. It distinguishes itself from siblings (list vs. build_checklist, create_deadline_tracker, get_obligation) by its broad listing 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 implies usage for browsing common obligations with optional filters, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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