Get Modelo 425 Summary (IGIC Annual Recap)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description provides output details (aggregated values and status) beyond annotations, but no additional behavioral traits like data freshness, authorization requirements, or limitations.

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 Spanish translation. It front-loads the purpose and includes an example, 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?

With one simple parameter, good annotations, and no output schema, the description explains the return fields adequately. It covers the necessary context for a summary tool without missing critical information.

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% for the single 'year' parameter, with description and example in schema. The tool description repeats the example but adds no further semantic meaning beyond what is already in 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 retrieves an IGIC Modelo 425 summary, specifying it's an annual IGIC recap for Canary Islands businesses. It lists key outputs (IGIC collected, deductible, net payable, filing status) and provides an example. This distinguishes it from sibling tools for other tax models.

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 for Modelo 425 IGIC annual recap, and the sibling tool list includes similar summary tools for other models, providing indirect guidance. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use directives or alternative suggestions.

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