get_inntekt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return content (income, deductions, tax) and the operation is implicitly a read ('Get'), but it does not mention permissions, error behavior, or any side effects. This is acceptable but not rich.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences. The first states the purpose, the second lists the return content. No wasted words.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description appropriately lists the key return components (employer-reported income, deductions, withholding tax). It is complete enough for a simple getter tool, though it omits details about output structure and does not emphasize the rettighetspakke requirement beyond the schema.

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 covers 100% of the parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add further meaning about individual parameters, though it clarifies the nature of the income data (employer-reported) which indirectly relates to the rettighetspakke parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource: income information for a person in a given month. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_inntekt_for_year' by specifying the monthly temporal scope, and it also lists what is returned (employer-reported income, deductions, withholding tax).

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 monthly scope implies when to use this tool, but it does not explicitly mention the alternative 'get_inntekt_for_year' or provide exclusion criteria. There is no guidance on prerequisites such as needing a valid rettighetspakke, though that appears in the schema.

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