For a given country, return the supported payroll engines (e.g. AU STP2 + super, IN PF/ESI/TDS/Form 24Q, US W-2/1099) with status (live/beta/coming-soon).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | Yes | Required ISO country code. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the operation returns data (read-only) and specifies the status values returned, but it does not mention error handling, edge cases, or authentication requirements.
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 a single, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with the purpose and gives concrete examples without extraneous words. Every part of the sentence adds value.
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 the simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the input, the shape of the output (list of engines with status), and possible status values. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.
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 schema already describes the country parameter as 'Required ISO country code' with 100% coverage. The description adds context with examples but not much semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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's function: for a given country, it returns supported payroll engines with their status. Examples (AU, IN, US) clarify the scope and distinguish it from sibling tools like country_support or statutory_rates.
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 implies the tool is used when needing payroll engine support information for a country, but it does not explicitly provide usage guidance, alternatives, or exclusions compared to sibling tools. Usage is inferable but not stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource: features, plans, competitors, country support, payroll engines, statutory rates, payment methods, and a free-text search across all of them. There is no overlap in purpose; even feature_search complements the list tools by handling ad-hoc queries.
Tool names are inconsistent: three use a 'list_' prefix (list_competitors, list_features, list_plans), while the rest are noun phrases like 'country_support', 'feature_search', 'local_payment_methods', 'payroll_capabilities', and 'statutory_rates'. There is no uniform verb_noun pattern, making names less predictable.
Eight tools is a well-scoped number for a product information server covering features, plans, competitors, countries, payroll, payments, and rates. Each tool has a clear role and the count is within the ideal range.
The tool surface covers all major categories one would expect for the HelloTime product domain: features, plans, competitor positioning, country-specific support, payroll engines, statutory rates, and payment methods. The feature_search tool further fills gaps by enabling cross-category queries, leaving no obvious dead ends.
