Income Tax New Regime

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the actual computation rules — standard deduction of Rs 75,000 and the Section 87A rebate making taxable income up to Rs 12,00,000 effectively tax-free — plus explicit exclusions. That is meaningful behavioral context beyond a bare calculator label, though it says nothing about rounding, output currency, or rounding-edge treatment.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by inclusions and exclusions. Every sentence carries distinct information and none is redundant.

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 tool is a simple two-parameter calculation, and an output schema exists so return-value explanation is unnecessary. The description covers scope, inclusions, and exclusions adequately; only the relation to the old-regime/comparison siblings is left implicit.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the note that age has no slab effect in the new regime. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, 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?

Specific verb ("Estimate") + resource ("income tax") + explicit regime and assessment-year scope. The regime qualifier in the name/description cleanly separates it from sibling income_tax_old_regime and income_tax_compare_regimes.

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?

States applicability precisely (FY 2026-27, new regime) and gives a clear when-not-to-rely-on-it caveat: surcharge and capital-gains special rates are excluded. It does not explicitly route the agent to income_tax_old_regime or income_tax_compare_regimes, so it stops short of full alternative coverage.

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