list_taxes

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc.), the description adds no behavioral details. It doesn't disclose that the result set can be paginated via offset/limit, that date filters active taxes, or that scope/types filter the results. While annotations cover the safety profile, the description contributes no additional context about the tool's behavior.

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, concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the purpose immediately and earns its place, though it is minimal. This is appropriate conciseness.

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?

For a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is too terse. It doesn't mention pagination, filtering, or what a tax object contains. With no output schema, the description should provide more context about the returned data, but it only states the obvious. The annotations help with safety, but not with functional completeness.

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 schema covers all 5 parameters with full descriptions (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. It doesn't, and the baseline 3 applies because the schema already provides the heavy lifting. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the parameter names/descriptions.

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 'Fetch a list of taxes' uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('list of taxes'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_tax (fetch a single tax) and delete_tax (delete a tax). The plural 'list' signals a collection operation, so purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any filtering, pagination, or contrast with search_taxes (which doesn't exist but there are search_* tools). The only usage context is implied by the name, so there is no explicit when-to-use guidance.

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