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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds one useful behavioral constraint about demo mode being limited to 2026, but it does not explain what demo mode means or what other behavioral limits apply.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence adds a relevant constraint, though the phrase 'demo mode' is vague and could have been clearer.

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?

With no output schema and a minimal description, an agent lacks important invocation details: valid filing_status values, expected return shape, supported years outside demo mode, and the relationship to other tax tools. The tool appears simple, but these gaps make reliable use uncertain.

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 only 50%, and the description does not compensate. The year parameter lacks an explicit accepted range or format beyond its default, and filing_status has no explanation of valid values or how it affects the deduction. The demo-mode sentence only hints at year limitations.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Return standard deduction reference values.' This is clear enough to distinguish the tool from many siblings like tax_calculate or tax_federal_brackets, though it does not explicitly compare itself to those alternatives.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when an agent should choose this tool over related tax tools such as tax_federal_brackets, tax_summary, or tax_calculate. The 'Demo mode is limited to 2026' sentence is a constraint, not usage guidance.

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