list_taxes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the underlying API call (GET /v1/taxes) and the return structure (dict with total, taxes[], and fields like id, name, rate, included_in_price). This gives the agent a clear expectation of output, though it does not explicitly state read-only semantics, the name 'list' and 'GET' imply it.

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 well-structured with clear headers (【用途】, 【呼叫的 Shopline API】, 【回傳結構】) and every sentence provides value. It is compact, front-loaded with the main purpose, and avoids any 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?

For a simple no-argument list operation, the description is complete: it covers purpose, usage context, API endpoint, and return structure. Since there is no output schema, the description properly fulfills the need to explain the return format.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description correctly does not add unnecessary parameter details, earning the baseline of 4 for a no-parameter tool.

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 opens with '取得商店設定的稅率清單' (get the store's configured tax rate list), which is a specific verb+resource statement. It also provides examples (營業稅、消費稅) and clearly distinguishes itself from all sibling tools that focus on orders, products, customers, etc.

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 【用途】 section states when to use this tool: '適合確認稅率設定或在財務分析時核對稅務規則' (suitable for confirming tax settings or checking tax rules during financial analysis). This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, which is acceptable given no comparable tax tool exists among siblings.

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