calculate_tds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true and idempotentHint: true, so the tool is known to be a safe, idempotent calculation. The description does not contradict these and adds context about the calculation scope. It does not reveal additional behavioral traits, but given the strong annotations, this is sufficient.

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 with two sentences. The first sentence states the core function and year, the second lists use cases. There is no redundancy or wasted words.

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 high schema coverage and existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It is complete for the tool's complexity, though a brief mention of the return format could further improve 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so each parameter already has a description in the input schema. The tool description does not add extra semantic detail beyond listing some use cases. Baseline for high coverage is 3, and there is no additional enrichment.

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 specifies the verb 'calculate', the resource 'TDS', and the tax year 'FY2025-26'. It lists specific applicable scenarios (contractor payments, professional fees, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'calculate_income_tax' which cover broader tax calculations.

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 explicit use cases: 'Use when computing withholding tax on contractor payments, professional fees, interest, rent, commissions, or purchase of goods.' This gives clear positive guidance, but it does not mention when not to use or explicitly name alternative tools, which slightly reduces the score.

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