kontist_get_tax_reserves

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly explains that null fields are returned when sub-accounts are not enabled or when Kleinunternehmer status applies, which is valuable edge-case behavior. It does not discuss errors or authentication, but the read-only nature is clear from 'Get'.

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 succinct sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the null-condition edge case follows naturally, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 no-parameter read-only tool, the description is complete: it states what is returned and when fields may be null. It could optionally mention currency or value format, but that is not essential for selecting and invoking a no-argument tool.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is effectively 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add. The description appropriately focuses on the output behavior instead of parameter details.

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 ('Get') and resource ('Kontist VAT and income tax reserve sub-accounts'), clearly distinguishing it from the general kontist_get_balance sibling. It also states the exact scope of what is returned, so an agent can identify the tool's purpose without ambiguity.

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 implies when to use it: when current tax reserve balances are needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives like kontist_get_balance for general balances, leaving some inference to the agent.

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