trybiut_reports_taxes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal that access is restricted by login and that data may be incomplete without a subscription, which is useful. It does not clarify what 'full data' includes, whether any side effects exist, or what the report's shape is.

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 short sentences, with the core object front-loaded and no filler words. Every clause adds meaningful information.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool, the description covers the essential call conditions: who it applies to, login, and subscription gating. It is less explicit about the report's contents or return structure, but the absence of parameters and output schema makes this a minor gap.

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?

There are zero parameters, so there is nothing the description needs to add to the input schema. The baseline of 4 for no-parameter tools applies.

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 identifies the resource ('detailed tax report') and its scope ('of the logged-in user'), making the tool's purpose understandable. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tax-reporting tools such as trybiut_dashboard_taxes, trybiut_tax_history, or trybiut_tax_calculate.

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?

It gives a clear prerequisite ('Requires login') and a gating caveat ('subscription for full data'), which implies when the tool can be used. But it offers no explicit comparison to sibling tools, so an agent gets little help deciding between this and the other tax tools.

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