Prepare contribution files

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and idempotency. The description adds context about atomic file writing, loading cached data, and network isolation, which goes beyond annotations and helps the agent understand side effects.

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?

A single sentence that packs the core action, inputs, outputs, and a key constraint (no network). No wasted words, and the most critical behavioral detail is front-loaded.

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 (nested objects, 5 params) and lack of output schema, the description covers the main flow but omits details like error conditions, post-conditions, or how the produced files are consumed. It is adequate for a basic understanding but not exhaustive.

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 60%, with descriptions for payDate, employer, and previousEmployees. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning, and the remaining 40% (period, employees) rely solely on schema structure. This is adequate but not enhanced by the description.

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?

States a specific verb (prepare) and resource (contribution files), and outlines the process: load cached employer and prior baseline, calculate contributions, write XLSX and TXT files. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like upload_contribution or submit_contribution by focusing on the preparation step.

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?

Implies it's the offline preparation step before upload/submit, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. The 'No network access' note hints at its role, but no direct guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools.

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