Update Tax Knowledge

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a key trait: the update is stored as an override and the original hardcoded value is preserved as a fallback. This goes beyond the schema and helps the agent understand the tool's non-destructive nature.

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?

Three sentences plus examples; no fluff. The content is front-loaded with the action and usage trigger, then the override behavior, then concrete examples. Every sentence earns its place.

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 9-parameter schema with 100% coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and a critical behavioral trait. It is complete enough for an agent to select and call the tool, though it doesn't describe return values (no output schema obligates that).

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description provides illustrative examples but does not add much parameter-level meaning beyond the schema's already detailed descriptions. It doesn't harm and slightly helps, but meets baseline.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('tax knowledge entry'), and clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by scoping to knowledge changes. It lists concrete examples ('GST rate', 'SBD limit') that further clarify the tool's 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?

States explicit use cases: 'when you discover that a rate has changed, a new rule applies, or the current knowledge is outdated.' This gives clear context, though it doesn't mention when not to use the tool or name alternative sibling tools, so it doesn't earn a 5.

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