aruba_tax_breakdown_report

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive behavior. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the grouping aspect. It does not describe pagination, data scope, or other traits. With annotations covering safety, the description provides little extra value.

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, well-front-loaded sentence without extraneous words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose, though additional brief details could improve completeness without harming conciseness.

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 6 parameters, 0 required, and many sibling report tools, the description is incomplete. It fails to clarify parameter usage or differentiate from similar tools like vat_summary or monthly_summary. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 0%, yet the description only mentions grouping by VAT rate/nature, which relates to the 'group_by' parameter. It does not explain 'direction', 'date_from', 'date_to', 'limit', or 'confirm_read' parameters, leaving most parameters semantically empty.

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 a tax breakdown report grouped by VAT rate/nature. It uses specific resource ('tax breakdown report') and grouping dimension, distinguishing it from general VAT summary or invoice reports among siblings.

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; no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The description only states what it does, not when to prefer it.

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