caps

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the information is general and not licensed financial advice, and that each item includes its source. However, it does not describe look-up behavior, supported year ranges, or handling of invalid inputs.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose and enumerates the returned categories, and the second adds a relevant disclaimer. No filler 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?

For a one-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns and the expected input format. Minor gaps include missing sibling routing and explicit supported-year bounds, but these are not critical for basic invocation.

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 0% and the schema only names financial_year as a string. The description adds a concrete format example ('2026-27') and clarifies that it refers to a single financial year, which is useful, but it does not define valid ranges or formatting constraints beyond the example.

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 clearly identifies the resource: caps and thresholds for a specific financial year, and enumerates the exact categories returned. It lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'get' and does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use caps versus sibling tools like list_rules, get_rule, search_rules, or contribution_headroom. The phrase 'for one financial year' implies the parameter usage, but there is no explicit when-to-use or 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.