compare_tax_regimes

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behaviors. It describes the comparison and outputs, but does not mention that it is read-only, any prerequisites, or limits. It is functionally clear but lacks explicit behavioral disclosure.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff. Front-loaded with the main action and key parameters. Could be slightly more structured, but effective.

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?

The description explains the output (effective rate, annual tax, best option) but omits details like assumptions or prerequisites. Given no annotations, it is reasonably complete for a quick comparison tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'setor' (comércio, serviços, indústria) and 'folha_pagamento_anual' (impacts Fator R), but 'faturamento_anual' is not elaborated. Partial compensation; baseline was low.

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 compares four specific Brazilian tax regimes (MEI, Simples Nacional, Lucro Presumido, Lucro Real) for given revenue and sector, returning effective rate, annual tax, and best option. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like consultar_simples_nacional or simular_transicao_reforma_tributaria.

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 it is useful for quick tax planning, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., simular_transicao_reforma_tributaria). Usage context is implied but not formally guided.

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