elster_ustva_detect_reverse_charge

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

No annotations provided, so the description must cover behavior. It mentions returns but omits side effects, required permissions, error cases, or whether the tool is read-only. The phrase 'based on the configured supplier patterns' hints at external configuration not explained.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action ('Tests whether...') and quickly states output. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 the domain-specific tax context, lack of output schema, and zero parameter explanations, the description fails to equip an agent for correct invocation. Essential details about input fields, configuration, and error conditions are missing.

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 0% and the description does not explain the parameters contactName and description. Agents cannot determine what values to provide or how these relate to the voucher being tested. This is a critical gap.

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 tests reverse-charge detection based on supplier patterns and specifies the output (matched supplier and region or null). It distinguishes from sibling tools like elster_ustva_confirm or elster_ustva_generate_xml by focusing on detection.

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 on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. The description only states what it does, without clarifying prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions. Agents must infer context from the tool name alone.

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