Get Modelo 180 Summary (IRPF Rentals Annual)

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false. The description adds behavioral context by detailing the return value structure (per tenant, property, aggregate) and specifying it is an annual summary. No contradictions.

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 concise with two sentences in English and Spanish, front-loading the purpose and key details. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is clean and efficient.

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 one optional parameter and an output schema present, the description fully covers the tool's functionality. It explains what data is returned and provides an example, leaving no gaps for the agent.

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 schema coverage is 100% with the 'period' parameter well-described. The description provides an example ('period='2025'') but adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool retrieves an IRPF annual informative summary for rental income withholdings (Modelo 180, Spain). It specifies the output includes total retentions per tenant, property, and annual aggregate, distinguishing it from other Modelo summary 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 description implies usage for rental income withholdings via Modelo 180, providing context but no explicit exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools like modelo_200 or modelo_303. The example and Spanish translation reinforce the intended use.

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