Get Modelo 202 Summary (Corporate Tax — Installment Payments)

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, not destructive. Description adds specific behavioral details: returns installment amounts, due dates, payment status, and cumulative total vs M200 projection. Also explains the three payments. This goes beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose and includes an example. The repetition in Spanish is acceptable for a bilingual context but adds length. Overall concise with 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, annotations covering safety, and a complete input schema, the description fully explains the tool's behavior and output. It mentions cumulative total vs M200 projection, which is additional useful context.

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 description adds an example and explains the enum values (1P=April, etc.), but the parameter descriptions in the schema already cover what they do. The description doesn't add significant new meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it gets a summary for Modelo 202 installment payments, specifies the three installments (1P, 2P, 3P) and what is returned (amounts, due dates, status, cumulative total vs M200 projection). Distinguishes from other modelo summaries by naming the specific form.

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?

Provides an example and describes the tool's purpose, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other modelo summaries like 200, 180). No guidelines on prerequisites or limitations.

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