get_selskapsskatt

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 explicitly states 'No authentication required,' which is a useful behavioral trait. The read-only nature is implied by 'Get rates,' and there are no side effects to disclose. For a simple zero-parameter lookup, this is adequate.

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 sentence of 17 words, front-loaded with the core purpose ('Get corporate income tax rates'), followed by a meaningful qualifier ('No authentication required'). Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 complexity (zero parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns (rates), for whom (limited companies and other entities), and access requirements (no authentication). It stops short of specifying the format of the rates (e.g., percentage), but this is a minor gap for such a simple tool.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly indicates that no parameters are needed, and since there are no parameters, no additional semantic information is required.

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 resource ('corporate income tax (selskapsskatt) rates'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle other tax types (e.g., VAT, personal tax). The scope 'for limited companies and other entities' adds clarity about applicability.

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 conveys clear context: use this tool when you need corporate income tax rates for companies. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but for a parameterless getter, this is sufficient. The note about no authentication adds practical usage guidance.

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