Brazilian tax transition calendar 2026-2033

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a genuine trait that structured fields do not: the $0.002 USDC x402 payment cost. Beyond that it says nothing about response shape, coverage boundaries, or whether the data is static reference versus query-scoped.

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 compact clauses: the content/scope is front-loaded and the cost note follows. No filler or repetition, though the first clause is dense with enumerated taxes.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description must hint at what comes back, and it does by listing the per-year in-force taxes and extinction dates for the named taxes. For a no-arg reference lookup this is close to complete, missing only a note on the exact return granularity.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter-level guidance is needed or missing.

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 names a specific resource (Brazilian tax transition calendar 2026-2033) and enumerates the exact content returned: which taxes are in force per year and when PIS/COFINS, IPI, ICMS and ISS are extinguished. An agent can tell what it gets without opening a schema, though there is no explicit differentiation from sibling tools like tributos_busca.

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?

Usage is implied by 'the context to know whether a tax rule still applies on a given date', which signals the temporal/applicability use case. However, it never states when to prefer this over tributos_busca or tributos_ncm, nor any prerequisites, so the agent must infer the routing.

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