tax_jurisdictions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns jurisdiction codes, tax types, and rates for 22 regions. However, it doesn't explicitly state it's a read-only operation or any other behavioral aspects, though that is implied.

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 very concise: three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose. It front-loads the primary action and efficiently adds context about regions and downstream use.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (jurisdiction codes, tax types, rates) and how many regions. It could be more explicit about the output structure, but it is sufficient for a simple list tool.

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 complete. The description does not need to add parameter details, and the baseline for no parameters is high. The description adds value by explaining what the output contains.

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 explicitly states 'List all 22 supported regions', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tax_jurisdiction_lookup and tax_estimate by specifying it lists all jurisdictions.

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 tells the agent to use this tool to match the user's location and pass the resulting code to fulfillment_order or tax_estimate. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use, the context is clear and provides practical guidance.

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