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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that the tool calculates and returns a structured object including federal and estimated cantonal tax, implying a read-only, no-side-effect operation. This is sufficient for a calculator.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose and output structure, and the second provides a useful cross-reference. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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's complexity (income tax calculation) and simple input (2 parameters), the description adequately explains the result fields. It compensates for the lack of an explicit output schema by listing key return fields. Minor omissions (e.g., methodology, error conditions) are acceptable.

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 input schema already describes both parameters with high coverage (100%): 'income' as annual taxable income in CHF and 'canton' as canton of residence. The description adds no additional parameter-level information, so it meets the baseline expectation.

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 explicitly states 'Calculate Swiss income tax — federal + estimated cantonal tax' and lists specific return fields, clearly defining the tool's purpose. It references a related bundle for context, which helps differentiate from other Swiss calculators.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus other Swiss tax calculators (e.g., wealth tax, VAT). It only mentions 'See list_bundles for related calculators' but gives no direct comparison or exclusion criteria.

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