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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add what the returned records contain (rate, inclusive/additive pricing, store applicability), but says nothing about pagination, result volume, or the soft-delete behavior surfaced by show_deleted.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with the payload description front-loaded; the trailing 'Loyverse: GET /taxes' endpoint mapping is marginal but harmless and cheap. No padding or repetition.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description usefully compensates by naming the fields a caller can expect. For a straightforward zero-required-parameter list tool with a fully described schema and a read-only annotation, this is nearly sufficient; only pagination/volume behavior is unstated.

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 all six parameters (tax_ids, show_deleted, created_at bounds, updated_at bounds) are already fully documented. The description adds no filter syntax or usage nuance beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (taxes), plus the salient attributes returned: rate, INCLUDED vs ADDED price treatment, and applicable stores. No sibling tool lists taxes, so an agent can distinguish it immediately by name and description without opening the schema.

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?

Listing usage is implied by the verb and the name, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to reach for filters like created_at_min/updated_at_min, and no named alternative. Nothing misleading, but nothing beyond the obvious.

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