bokio_get_fiscal_year

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that start and end dates are returned; it says nothing about error behavior, permission requirements, or company scoping beyond what the schema states.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose; every clause earns its place by either defining the operation or routing to the alternative.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description at least names the fields returned (start and end dates) for this simple two-parameter read. Given the tool's low complexity and full annotation coverage, that is close to complete, though a bit more detail on the response would help.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters already document their semantics, including the not-found error and the BOKIO_COMPANY_ID default. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so this is the baseline case where the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one fiscal year by id') and even names the return shape (start and end dates). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling bokio_list_fiscal_years, so an agent can choose between them without opening a schema.

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 second sentence tells the agent to use bokio_list_fiscal_years when all fiscal years are wanted, which implicitly defines this tool's niche (fetching a single known id). It stops short of stating when-not-to-use (e.g., when the id is unknown, though the schema covers that).

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