get_natura_codes

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

The description states 'Always succeeds' and outlines the return format. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and adequately discloses behavior, including the deprecation of parent codes, which is helpful for correct usage.

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 well-structured with front-loaded purpose, followed by usage guidance and examples. It is efficient but could be slightly more concise by merging the code list into a single line.

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 has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description fully covers the return format and legal references. It is complete for the tool's intended use.

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 has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details, earning a baseline of 4 for no parameters.

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 returns the complete list of valid Natura exemption codes with legal references. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tool get_regime_fiscale_codes.

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 explicitly advises when to call this tool: when add_linea_dettaglio() requires a Natura code with aliquota_iva 0.0. It provides common codes and notes on deprecated parent codes, offering clear context although it doesn't state when not to use it.

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