get_irpf_table

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It indicates a read operation ('Retorna') and adds the specific year 2026, which is a useful behavioral constraint. However, it does not disclose the format of the returned table, whether it is static or computed, or any limitations.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then lists the included components. There is no repetition of the tool name and no extraneous text.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description gives a reasonable summary of the return value ('faixas, alíquotas e parcelas de dedução') and specifies the year. It does not describe the exact structure of the table, but for a simple retrieval tool, the essential context is present.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema already covers all inputs trivially with 100% coverage. Per the baseline for 0-parameter tools, the description need not add parameter information, and it does not attempt to.

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 states a specific verb ('Retorna') and resource ('tabela do Imposto de Renda Pessoa Física 2026'), and it lists the expected content (faixas, alíquotas, parcelas de dedução). This is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like get_inss_table or get_current_rates because it is explicitly the IRPF table for a specific year.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. While the name implies it is for retrieving IRPF tables, the description itself offers no contextual 'when to use' or 'use instead' cues among the many sibling calculators.

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