List old-regime deductions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (no side effects) and openWorldHint=false. Description adds value by specifying the checklist includes statutory caps and the exact deduction sections, going beyond the structured fields.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. First sentence describes output; second sentence explains utility. Every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (checklist with caps) and how to use it. Minor lack of return format details, but overall sufficient.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'fy', so the schema already documents it. Description does not add further parameter meaning, meeting baseline for high coverage.

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?

Description clearly states it returns an old-regime deduction checklist with statutory caps for specific sections (80C, 80CCD(1B), etc.), and distinguishes from siblings like compute_tax and compare_regimes by providing the deduction data rather than computing taxes.

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?

Description explicitly states it is useful for estimating the 'deductions' input to compute_tax/compare_regimes, providing clear usage context. Does not mention when not to use or alternative tools, but the guidance is sufficient.

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