Booking-account guidance

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

With no annotations provided, the description handles behavioral disclosure well. It explicitly states 'Read-only' and 'output is capped, never the full account dump.' This informs the agent about safety and limitations. No contradictions.

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 three sentences long. It front-loads the core purpose and adds key behavioral notes. Every sentence is informative with no unnecessary words.

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 guidance tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and its constraints. It lacks details on the exact response structure, but the context makes it usable.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by summarizing filtering capabilities ('Filter by text, account number or tax rule') and mentioning the cap behavior, but does not provide substantial new detail beyond the schema.

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 tool provides booking guidance: which DATEV/SKR accounts exist for expenses/revenue and their allowed tax rules/rates. It specifies it's the validation table sevDesk uses. This distinguishes it from other sevdesk tools like sevdesk_create_voucher or sevdesk_list_vouchers.

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 mentions filtering by text, account number, or tax rule, and that output is capped. It implies usage for exploring accounts before booking. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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