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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the possible statuses, including 'not_enough_data', 'county_not_served', and 'already_filed', which are important behavioral outcomes. It also clarifies that the tool is non-destructive ('never raise it'), which is valuable.

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 paragraph but is dense and well-structured. It front-loads the core purpose, then lists the return statuses and outcomes efficiently. Minor redundancy (e.g., 'free' repeated) but overall concise.

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 tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main behavioral aspects: possible statuses, the meaning of a qualifying result, and the safety guarantee. Missing nuance on how to interpret each status, but acceptable for the complexity.

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 schema already explains both parameters (address and unit). The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, but since coverage is high, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: checking if a California home qualifies for Proposition 8 property tax reduction. It uses a specific verb ('check') and resource ('property tax savings'), and distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning the continueToken for start_filing.

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 explicitly mentions the tool is free and can only lower taxes, and implies it should be used before start_filing by referencing the continueToken. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, though siblings are get_filing_status and start_filing.

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