get_fagforeningsfradrag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that authentication is not required, but omits other behavioral traits such as whether the value is static or calculated, data freshness, or return format. This is minimal disclosure for a get-style tool.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the purpose and includes a key access note. There is no wasted wording, and the structure is optimally concise.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context for basic usage. It explains what is retrieved and the authentication requirement. However, it could be slightly more complete by indicating the return type or that it's a fixed annual amount, so a small gap remains.

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, so the input schema fully covers the parameter space (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and this is met.

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 tool as retrieving the union membership deduction (fagforeningsfradrag) and specifies it returns the maximum deductible union fee. While this is a clear verb+resource indication, it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools beyond the unique name.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only usage-related note is 'No authentication required,' which is more of an access prerequisite than a contextual recommendation. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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