Search Tax Facts

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

Annotations already convey read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that results are keyword-matched facts spanning all categories, but does not disclose ranking behavior, result limits, or whether partial matches are included. This is acceptable but not rich.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and trigger, with no filler or repetition. Every phrase earns its place.

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 read-only search tool with robust annotations and fully documented parameters, the description provides adequate context. It lacks an explicit return-shape note, but 'Returns matching tax facts' is a reasonable high-level summary given no output 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%, so the parameters are already well described. The description adds nothing about tax_year or query syntax beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('search'), a clear resource ('UK tax knowledge'), and a precise trigger ('when unsure which category/item to look up'). It emphasizes 'across all categories,' distinguishing it from category-specific or item-specific lookups like get_tax_facts.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: when the user is unsure which category or item to look up. It does not name alternative tools or describe when not to use it, so it stops short of a full usage-routing statement.

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