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

The description discloses that the tool returns tax due and effective rate, and implies no side effects. With no annotations provided, this is adequate transparency for a calculation tool.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, use case, inputs/outputs, and reference to related tools. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

The description covers core behavior and references outputs, but the missing region parameter in schema versus description creates a gap in completeness. Output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed further.

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?

The description mentions 'region' as an input, but the input schema does not include a region parameter. This discrepancy reduces clarity and may mislead agents. Schema coverage is 100% but description adds inconsistent info.

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 computes Belgian donation tax by region, for estate planning, and specifies inputs and outputs. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on Belgian donation tax with regional variation.

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?

It provides a clear use case (estate planning in Belgium) and points to related tools via list_bundles. However, it does not explicitly exclude other contexts or mention alternatives for other tax calculations.

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