irs-taxpayer-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but offers no information about how it works - whether it returns a static list, requires authentication, has rate limits, or provides any metadata about the states. The description is purely functional without behavioral context.

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 communicates the complete purpose without any wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core functionality and appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool with no parameters.

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?

For a simple lookup tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations or output schema, it should ideally provide more context about what the output contains (just state names? with dates? source information?). The description covers the 'what' but not the 'how' or 'what you get back'.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, and the schema already documents the empty parameter set completely.

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 ('List all') and resource ('US states with no state income tax'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on a specific tax characteristic (no income tax states) rather than analysis, calculation, or comparison tools.

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 information about states without income tax is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'compare_state_taxes' or 'get_state_tax_info'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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