Get Modelo 130 Summary (IRPF Estimated Payment)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds the return fields (net income, expenses, etc.) but no extra behavioral details like auth or rate limits. Adequate but not enhanced beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences in English plus a Spanish translation. While clear, the Spanish part may be redundant for an English-speaking agent. Could be slightly more concise, but overall well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values. It already lists key fields. Single parameter, simple tool. The description is fully sufficient and complete for its purpose.

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?

Only one parameter 'period' with full schema coverage. The description repeats the format and gives an example, but adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema description.

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 verb 'Get', the specific resource 'Modelo 130 Summary', and the target audience ('freelancers/self-employed in Spain'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_modelo_303_summary by specifying the form type.

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 context makes usage clear (quarterly IRPF filing for self-employed in Spain), but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or exclusions are provided. However, the specificity of the tool name and description imply a narrow use case.

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