Get Modelo 200 Summary (Corporate Tax — Annual IS)

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds value by detailing the returned data fields and providing a usage example (year='2025') and deadline, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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 two sentences in English and two in Spanish, front-loaded with purpose and key details. Every sentence adds value (purpose, returned fields, deadline, example). No wasted words.

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 description is complete for a simple read tool with one parameter and an output schema (present but not shown). It covers purpose, target users, deadline, example, and parameter meaning. No gaps.

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% and the schema already describes the 'year' parameter. The tool description adds an example ('year="2025"') which is helpful but not essential. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states it 'Get Modelo 200 summary' for annual corporate income tax return, lists returned fields (taxable base, deductions, tax rate, etc.), and distinguishes from other tax summary tools via the sibling list. The verb and resource are specific.

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 identifies the target users (Spanish SLs and SAs) and gives the filing deadline, providing clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the sibling list implies alternatives for other tax forms.

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