Get Modelo 425 Summary (IGIC Annual Recap)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to repeat these. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the exact data returned (aggregated IGIC fields), which aligns with the read-only expectation and adds clarity beyond the 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 concise, with two clear sentences in English followed by a Spanish translation. It is front-loaded with purpose and quickly lists outputs. The bilingual content adds length but is appropriate for the target audience.

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 (one optional parameter, output schema present, comprehensive annotations), the description fully covers the necessary context. It specifies the returned fields, providing a complete understanding of what the tool produces without 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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents the 'year' parameter. The description only adds an example value ('year='2025''), which is helpful but does not provide additional semantics or constraints 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: retrieving the annual IGIC Modelo 425 summary for Canary Islands businesses. It lists returned data (IGIC collected, deductible, net payable, filing status) and uses specific verbs ('Get', 'Returns'). The title and name differentiate from sibling summary tools (e.g., modelo_180, modelo_200).

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 usage through the title and context ('annual IGIC recap'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other summary tools (e.g., quarterly models). No guidance on prerequisites or conditions for use is provided.

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