Get Modelo 415 Summary (IGIC Annual Operations >€3,005)

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and not destructiveHint. The description adds that it returns a counterparty list, operation totals, and filing deadline, which aligns with read-only behavior. However, it does not elaborate on other behaviors like data freshness or authentication requirements beyond the annotation hints.

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 concise, with two brief sentences in English followed by a Spanish translation. It is front-loaded with the essential information, though the bilingual duplication adds minor length without extra content.

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 simple parameter set (1 optional param), annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior: it specifies the return types (counterparty list, totals, deadline) and includes an example. No further context is needed for a read-only summarization 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 sole parameter 'year' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage) with an example and default behavior. The description reiterates the example 'year='2025'' but adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the tool retrieves an IGIC Modelo 415 summary, an annual declaration of operations with third parties over €3,005 in the Canary Islands, distinguishing it from similar models like Modelo 347 for peninsular Spain. The verb 'Get' and specified resource 'Modelo 415 Summary' provide clear purpose.

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 explicitly equates this to the Canary Islands equivalent of Modelo 347, guiding when to use this tool versus other fiscal declaration summaries. It also notes the €3,005 threshold, implying when it applies, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list direct alternatives.

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