Get Onboarding Status

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

Annotations already mark it as readOnlyHint=true, which is respected. The description adds context about the return content (property creation, income entry, etc.) but does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as data freshness, authorization requirements, or side effects.

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 that efficiently lists the key components. However, in French it is somewhat long; could be slightly restructured for clarity.

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?

With no output schema, the description should outline the return structure more clearly (e.g., whether it returns boolean flags, percentages, etc.). It only lists components without specifying their format. The year parameter ambiguity also reduces completeness.

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 has one optional parameter 'year' with 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'current year' but does not explain that the parameter allows specifying a different year, leading to ambiguity. It adds minimal value 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 returns the progress status of LMNP onboarding, listing specific components. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_dashboard_summary, but does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 versus alternatives like get_dashboard_summary or list_fiscal_years. The description only explains what it does, not under what conditions it should be preferred.

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