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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. The phrase 'live preview' suggests no data mutation, but this is not explicitly stated. There is no mention of side effects, required permissions, or whether the operation is safe. An agent might infer read-only, but the lack of certainty is a gap.

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 sentence, which is concise but omits important information. It earns its place in brevity but sacrifices completeness. The structure is front-loaded with the key action, but could be extended to cover essentials.

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 parameter richness (6 params, 2 required) and low schema coverage, the description is under-informative. It does not reference the output schema or explain the return value. The 'live preview' and rule pattern hint are helpful but insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the tool.

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 17% (only npub is described). The description adds no parameter details beyond mentioning 'rule pattern', which corresponds to description_pattern. Critical parameters like session_id, amount_value, and amount_operator are unexplained. The description does not compensate for the sparse 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 'count' and the resource 'transactions matching a rule pattern', and adds 'live preview' to indicate it's non-binding. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like taxsort_apply_rules (which modifies data) and taxsort_get_rules (which lists rules). However, it could more explicitly contrast with similar counting tools if any exist.

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 is provided on when to use this versus alternative tools such as taxsort_save_rule (to save rules) or taxsort_apply_rules (to execute rules). The 'live preview' hint is the only usage hint, but it's implicit. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite context is given.

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