grc_tax_obligation_scan

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions routing through a dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope, but does not state whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or has side effects. Missing key behavioral context.

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 relatively short (two paragraphs), but the first paragraph is redundant (restates name). It front-loads the action name but wastes the opening sentence. Could be more efficient.

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 tax scan tool with no schema descriptions and no annotations, the description should clearly explain what the tool does, what results to expect, and when to invoke it. It fails to provide this essential context, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It describes `message` as 'free-text objective' and `inputs` as 'optional JSON string of structured inputs', but does not specify expected formats, constraints, or examples. This adds minimal value beyond the schema's bare property names.

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 restates the tool name ('Run the grc domain agent action `tax_obligation_scan`') without clarifying what a tax obligation scan accomplishes. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like grc_tax_compliance_report or grc_tax_deadline_alerts.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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