Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

GWIX

by ai.gwix
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Pay by experience level (entry, intermediate, senior)

pay_by_experience_level
Read-onlyIdempotent

For how pay differs by experience or seniority for a job: entry-level, intermediate and senior pay in a city, state or country, and the premium for each step. For one overall pay figure, use salary_and_hiring_report. GWIX's own analyst: answers a question with a full, sourced report that combines every relevant GWIX source (job ads, advertised pay, hiring) with official statistics (BLS, Census, ONS and other agencies), with percentiles, trends, comparisons, chart data, what it means, and a citation for every figure. Free Ask GWIX answers are used first; the result shows any credits used.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "question": "<question>"
    },
    "name": "pay_by_experience_level"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
placeNoWith occupation_code: the city with state (Houston, TX), metro or state in the question.
countryNoWith occupation_code and no place: ISO-2 country (US, GB).
questionYesThe user's question in their words, with any place, role, company, industry or period they gave.
occupation_codeNoWhen the question names a job: its SOC 2018 code, as soc_2018:29-1141 (registered nurses). Lets the GWIX panel show a quick summary while the report is written.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add genuinely useful cost behavior — free Ask GWIX answers consumed first and credits shown in the result — plus the fact that a sourced report is generated. But most of the remaining prose (sources, percentiles, charts) is generic marketing text rather than this tool's specific behavior, so credit is partial.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first two sentences are tight and front-loaded where it matters. The remaining ~60% is a generic GWIX analyst pitch that does not distinguish this tool and would apply equally to several siblings, so it does not earn its space.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, but the description does describe what comes back — a sourced report with percentiles, trends, comparisons, chart data and a citation per figure — which covers return expectations. With all four parameters fully documented in the schema, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only the report-vs-quick-panel distinction and latency feel underspecified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents place, country, question and occupation_code thoroughly, including the SOC-2018 example. The description only echoes geography scope ('city, state or country') and says nothing about how occupation_code interacts with place/country beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening sentence names a specific verb and resource — entry/intermediate/senior pay by geography plus the step premium — which is enough to distinguish it from generic pay tools. However, it then pivots into a long generic paragraph about 'GWIX's own analyst' that reads as boilerplate shared with ask_gwix and obscures rather than sharpens the tool's identity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit routing is given: 'For one overall pay figure, use salary_and_hiring_report.' That is a concrete alternative plus the condition that selects it. There is no guidance on when not to use it or prerequisites such as needing an occupation_code for the quick panel.

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

All GWIX toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources