trybiut_tax_calendar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose that the tool is public and requires no login, implying a safe read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it describe response behavior or any rate limits.

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 no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded. It could be slightly more informative, but it earns its place by conveying the public, no-login nature efficiently.

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 simple tool with one optional year parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: it names the resource and notes the lack of auth requirements. It is missing return-format details and any limitations/edge-case behavior, but the low complexity means this is not a critical 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 is only one parameter, year, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description only mentions 'for a year,' which adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name and schema constraints (default 2026, min 2020, max 2100). It does not explain the optionality or the practical effect of choosing different years beyond the obvious.

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 resource ('tax obligations calendar') and scope ('for a year'), and the 'Public'/'No login needed' phrasing helps distinguish it from user-specific tax tools like trybiut_tax_calculate or trybiut_tax_history. It is not a tautology, though it never names sibling tools explicitly.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this calendar versus alternatives such as trybiut_tax_preview, trybiut_tax_calculate, or trybiut_tax_history. 'No login needed' is a useful auth condition, but there is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or explicit alternative routing.

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