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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention destructive potential, idempotency, error states, or what happens to the input data. The existence of an output schema is not leveraged to describe return values.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It efficiently communicates the core action and scope.

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 that an output schema exists, the description should explain what the tool returns or accomplishes beyond the input. It omits information about the outcome (e.g., number of transactions affected, errors). Mutation behavior and session state changes are unclear.

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?

Only 33% of schema parameters have descriptions in the schema (npub), and the tool description adds no additional meaning. session_id lacks description, and dpop_token is empty. The description does not explain how parameters relate to the action.

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 action ('apply rules'), the target ('unclassified transactions'), and the context ('in a session'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like taxsort_save_rule and taxsort_get_rules by focusing on applying existing rules.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., having a session and rules), or when not to use it. The description lacks context about workflow ordering.

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