Mark Return as Filed

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the action 'Updates your filing status tracker,' which is minimal. It does not disclose whether the action is irreversible, whether it overwrites existing data, requires specific permissions, or what the response will be. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 two sentences, directly to the point, with no fluff or redundancy. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately 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?

The tool is relatively simple, and the schema fully documents parameters. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not explain what the tool returns or how success is indicated. Given the simplicity, the description is adequate for basic invocation but lacks completeness for understanding the full response behavior.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all four parameters clearly documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate. It does not explain parameter relationships or edge cases.

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's action: 'Mark a tax return as filed.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like filing_status (which is likely for viewing status) and preparation tools. The addition 'Updates your filing status tracker' reinforces the purpose.

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 when to use the tool (after filing a return, to update tracking) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. No exclusions or distinct scenarios are provided.

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