spraay_tax_calculate

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

Annotations indicate it's not read-only and not destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context: data persists in Supabase, costs $0.01 USDC, and has a 500-transaction limit. This goes beyond annotations to inform the agent of side effects and constraints.

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-structured sentence that includes all essential information: calculation method, transaction limit, return structure, persistence, and cost. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 complexity of crypto tax calculation and the presence of an output schema and full parameter documentation, the description adequately covers key aspects. It mentions method, limit, return format, persistence, and cost, though it could have clarified payment prerequisites.

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 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as parameter format or usage tips. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 calculates crypto tax gain/loss using FIFO method with a transaction limit of 500. It uses a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('crypto tax gain/loss'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like spraay_tax_report by specifying the method and scope.

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 versus alternatives like spraay_tax_report. It lacks context on prerequisites, exclusions, or situations where a different tool would be more appropriate.

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