Step-by-step ITR filing checklist

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces that this is 'guidance only' with no automated action. The description adds context about the portal steps and e-verification, going beyond the annotations to clarify the tool's non-destructive nature.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Ordered, form-specific walkthrough') and efficiently lists the covered areas. No extraneous information is included.

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 the tool is read-only guidance with no output schema, the description provides all necessary information: what it covers (documents, reconciliation, computation, portal steps, e-verification), and that it is guidance only. The sibling tools are complementary, making this complete.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (fy with default, form with enum and suggestion to use recommend_itr_form). Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add much. It mentions 'form-specific' which aligns with the form parameter, but does not enhance understanding beyond 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 provides an 'ordered, form-specific walkthrough' for filing ITR-1/2/3/4 on incometax.gov.in, covering specific steps like documents, reconciliation, and e-verification. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which focus on individual computations or deductions.

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 the tool is for guidance by stating 'Guidance only -- the taxpayer performs the final submit on the portal themselves.' However, it does not explicitly list when not to use it or directly contrast with sibling tools, though the intent is clear.

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