declaration_forms

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

The description explicitly says 'Public, no account' and states that it 'Returns' information, implying a read-only, side-effect-free operation. It does not go into detail about potential logging or rate limits, but the nature of the tool (listing) is transparent enough.

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 yet informative, providing the core purpose, two concrete examples, the output format, and access characteristics in two sentences. It avoids unnecessary detail and is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 is complete for a simple listing tool: it names the forms, what they return, and access constraints. It does not cover error scenarios or pagination, but these are not essential for understanding how to use the 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?

The input schema is empty (no parameters), so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable given the absence of parameters. Baseline 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 that this tool lists ANAF declaration forms that Storno can build from plain JSON, with specific examples (C168, D212) and the return content (type, title, description). It is distinct from sibling tools like declarations_list or declaration_form_spec by focusing on the form catalog itself.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus related alternatives (e.g., declaration_form_spec, declaration_build). It mentions 'Public, no account' but does not explain scenarios where one would prefer this over other declaration-related tools.

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