calculate_canada_combined_tax

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the calculation and lists some return fields, but does not disclose tax year, rate sources, border cases (e.g., zero income, non-residents), or operational details beyond the basic formula.

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 consists of two focused sentences: the first defines the primary action, the second hints at return structure and references related tools. It is concise and front-loaded, though could be slightly more structured.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (as indicated in context signals), the description provides sufficient context for a simple parameter tool. However, it lacks specification of the tax year, which is important for a tax calculator. Overall, it covers the main aspects.

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 (income_cad) is already fully documented in the schema with description 'Annual income in CAD'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond mentioning the combined calculation and abatement, so score is baseline 3.

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 the tool calculates combined Quebec and federal income tax with the specified abatement (16.5%). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like calculate_canada_federal_tax or calculate_quebec_income_tax by explicitly combining both jurisdictions.

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 mentions 'See list_bundles for related ... calculators' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus separate federal or provincial calculators. It lacks clear when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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