Retrieve a single tax declaration by UUID to view full details, including populated data, status, metadata, and error messages.
Get a single tax declaration by UUID. Returns full declaration details including populated data, status, metadata, and error messages.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Declaration UUID | |
| companyId | No | Company UUID (overrides STORNO_COMPANY_ID env var) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.17Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value by enumerating what the response contains (populated data, status, metadata, error messages), which matters since no output schema exists.
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?
Two tight sentences: the operation is front-loaded, and the second sentence covers the return payload with no filler.
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 output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields, and annotations cover the safety profile. Only the companyId override behavior is left to the schema.
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% and both parameters (id, companyId override) are documented in the schema. The description mentions the UUID lookup but adds no extra semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 (Get) and resource (single tax declaration) plus the key (UUID). It is clearly distinguishable from declarations_list, though it never names that sibling explicitly.
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 get-by-UUID pattern implies usage, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus declarations_list or dosare_get, and no prerequisites (auth, company scoping) are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.