get_bilgodtgjorelse

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a key behavioral trait (no authentication required) and clarifies the nature of the data (tax-free rates per km). However, it does not mention whether this is a read-only operation, data recency, or any limitations, leaving some gaps for a zero-parameter rate lookup.

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 with no redundant words. It front-loads the main purpose and adds the relevant qualifiers (tax-free per km and no auth) efficiently.

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 zero-parameter, read-only rate lookup with no output schema, the description provides enough context: it explains what is returned (rates per km), the tax treatment, and the auth requirement. There are no missing details that would prevent an agent from invoking it correctly.

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 tool accepts zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully defines the input space. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, but since there are no parameters, this is acceptable and the baseline of 4 applies.

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 identifies the resource as car mileage reimbursement rates (kilometergodtgjørelse / bilgodtgjørelse) and specifies the type of data (tax-free rates per km). This is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling rate-related tools.

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 phrase 'Get car mileage reimbursement rates' implies this is the tool to use when mileage rates are needed, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives or any exclusions. The 'No authentication required' note provides some context but not full usage guidance.

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