list_declarations

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

Annotations only declare read-only/idempotent behavior; the description adds meaningful semantics: VAT can mean VAT-UE, JPK includes payable VAT, ZUS components remain separate, and paid/remaining is bookkeeping state. These are important interpretation details beyond the structured annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by compact caveats. Every sentence contributes useful information without restating schema or annotations.

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?

For a simple list tool with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers scope, page limitation, and semantic caveats well. However, it never defines what 'saved period' means or how an agent can access other pages, leaving minor operational gaps.

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 only parameter, kind, has no schema descriptions and the description only clarifies two of the four enum values (VAT, JPK). The 'tax' and 'zus' values remain mostly implicit, so the description partially compensates for the schema gap but not completely.

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?

Description opens with 'Read declarations for the saved period,' identifying a clear verb and resource. It adds scope details like 'Current page only' but does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as get_declaration or get_vat_register.

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?

Gives clear usage context: the saved period, current-page limitation, and separation of ZUS components. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternative tools, but the context is sufficient for basic selection.

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