irs-taxpayer-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes a read-only operation ('Get') but does not disclose behavioral traits such as data freshness, rate limits, error handling, or authentication needs. The description is minimal and lacks context about what 'key details' includes or how the information is structured.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and key details without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying what is retrieved and for whom.

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 annotations, no output schema, and a simple input schema, the description is adequate but has clear gaps. It states what the tool does but lacks details on behavioral aspects, return format, or error cases. For a tool with no structured support, it should provide more context to be fully helpful.

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%, with the parameter 'stateCode' fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, as it does not explain parameter usage, constraints, or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Get') and resource ('state income tax information') with details about what information is retrieved ('rates, brackets, and key details') and scope ('for any US state'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'compare_state_taxes' or 'estimate_state_tax' by focusing on retrieval of information rather than comparison or estimation.

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 implies usage when state tax information is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'compare_state_taxes' or 'list_no_income_tax_states'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage context somewhat open-ended.

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