tax_payer_info_activation

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

Annotations already indicate mutability (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). The description adds the SMS verification step but does not elaborate on side effects, permissions, or reversibility. There is no contradiction with 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 short (two sentences) but includes a Georgian translation that may be redundant for English users. Information is front-loaded in English.

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 only two parameters and clear schema, the description is adequate but does not explain what 'payer info access' entails or state potential errors. No output schema exists, but the tool's purpose is straightforward.

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%, so the description adds no new parameter info. The mention of 'activate/deactivate' aligns with status values, but this 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 action (activate/deactivate) and the resource (payer info access), and mentions the prerequisite (after SMS verification). However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like tax_gita_payer_activation.

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 after SMS verification but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions or exclusions.

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