wave_tax_summary

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, destructive, requires authentication, or what side effects may occur. As a report generator, it is likely non-destructive, but this is not explicit, leaving ambiguity.

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 concise (8 words, 1 sentence) with no fluff. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices completeness. It could be slightly longer to include critical usage details without losing 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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to specify the report format, content coverage (e.g., sales tax vs. input tax), or any response structure, leaving the agent with insufficient information to handle the output.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., date range). It does not explain the optional businessId parameter, which could be important for multi-business contexts.

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 action (Generate) and resource (tax summary report), and specifies the key constraint (for a date range). It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling report tools like wave_balance_sheet or wave_profit_and_loss, though it could be more explicit about what constitutes a tax summary.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over other report tools (e.g., wave_aged_receivables, wave_cashflow). It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where this report is appropriate.

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