Get GSTR-2B

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It notes the session requirement, which is a behavioral precondition, but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, potential side effects, or error behavior. Partial transparency at best.

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 exceptionally concise, consisting of two short sentences that convey the essential information without any redundant language or unnecessary detail.

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?

For a simple fetch operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete. It states the purpose, the required parameters via the schema, and the session prerequisite, covering all necessary context for an agent to use the 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 schema already provides descriptions and examples for both parameters (year and month), achieving 100% coverage. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema states, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Fetch' and the resource 'GSTR-2B', along with the scope 'for a return period'. It accurately conveys the tool's function without ambiguity.

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires an active taxpayer session') but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like get_gstr3b or track_returns_current. The usage context is implied rather than clearly differentiated.

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