Prepare GST Return Worksheet

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on the full burden. It discloses that the tool compiles data from transactions and shows what to report, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state the tool's read-only nature, required setup, or any side effects, leaving some room for inference.

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 long, front-loads the primary action ('Compile...'), and adds the key outcome ('Shows exactly what to report'). Every word is purposeful with no repetition or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description adequately covers purpose, process, and result. It explains what the resulting worksheet contains conceptually. It doesn't address edge cases or prerequisites, but for this scope, it is sufficiently complete.

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 only parameter, 'period', is fully described in the schema with format examples, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description does not add any additional parameter-level semantics, so it meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 uses the specific verb 'Compile' and clearly identifies the resource: 'GST collected and ITCs paid from your transactions into a GST return worksheet.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like calculate_gst or prepare_t2_worksheet by focusing on worksheet preparation and reporting.

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 conveys clear context for when to use the tool: when you need to compile transaction data into a GST return worksheet. It implies the report-ready purpose, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it misses the top score.

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