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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true, and the description adds context that it writes a live tax/compliance record, emphasizing the irreversible nature for filings. This goes beyond the annotation by specifying the compliance impact.

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 sentences plus endpoint URL are concise and efficient. The action verb is front-loaded, and each sentence provides essential information without fluff.

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 no output schema and destructiveHint annotation, the description sufficiently explains the tool's purpose and usage. It mentions the prerequisite calculation_id and the compliance nature, but could be improved by noting error scenarios or idempotency.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are described in schema. The description adds marginal value by highlighting calculation_id and reference_order_id, but does not mention metadata or transaction_processed_at. It does not fully compensate for low coverage since coverage is already high.

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 uses a specific verb ('RECORDS') and resource ('completed sale as a transaction'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like numeral_calculate_tax. It explicitly states the action and the purpose (live tax/compliance record for filings).

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 indicates the tool is for completed sales and requires a calculation_id from numeral_calculate_tax and a reference_order_id. It implies context but does not explicitly exclude scenarios like refunds (handled by numeral_create_refund) or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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