Retrieve VAT purpose codes (ucel DPH) for use in accounting documents and tax reporting. Apply filters and pagination to find specific purposes.
List VAT purposes (ucel DPH). Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| skip | No | ||
| take | No | ||
| order | No | GraphQL order clause | |
| where | No | GraphQL where filter |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the 'Read-only' statement is a meaningful behavioral disclosure and helps agents understand the operation is non-mutating. However, the description does not mention other relevant behavior such as pagination, result size limits, or whether the endpoint returns all records or just a page.
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 extremely concise: two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded and the read-only safety signal is included in a compact second sentence.
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 list endpoint with all-optional parameters, the description covers the basic purpose and safety profile. However, without an output schema, it does not describe what the returned list contains, and it does not clarify the relationship between 'VAT purposes' and the sibling 'VAT classifications', leaving some selection ambiguity.
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 schema already documents 'order' and 'where' as GraphQL clauses, and the default/minimum/maximum values clarify 'skip' and 'take'. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, but the parameter names and schema constraints are reasonably self-explanatory, so this is acceptable though not enriched.
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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('VAT purposes'), with a helpful Czech gloss ('ucel DPH'). It is clear enough to identify the tool's function, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from the nearby sibling m3_vat_classifications.
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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool rather than a sibling list tool, such as m3_vat_classifications or m3_currencies. The description implies a read-only listing use case but gives no exclusions or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.