list_fiscal_years

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

The description discloses that confirmed years are immutable ('Nothing can be written into a confirmed year'), which is a behavioral constraint beyond just listing. It does not explicitly state side effects (though listing implies read-only), but the warning adds useful transparency.

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 concise sentence that conveys the purpose and an important behavioral note without unnecessary detail.

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?

The description fully explains what the tool does (lists fiscal years, identifies current and confirmed) and includes a relevant warning about confirmed years, providing enough context for a user to know when and why to call it.

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 has no parameters, so coverage is complete. The description adds nothing about parameters, but since there are none, this is neutral and meets the baseline.

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 ('List') and the resource ('fiscal years'), and specifies the output includes current and confirmed status. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_draft or add_purchase_invoice.

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 does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives. The note that nothing can be written into a confirmed year provides indirect guidance (e.g., check before writing), but it lacks clear when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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