calculate_severanceCalculate an Iranian employee's end-of-service entitlements (حق سنوات، عیدی، مانده مرخصی) under قانون کار, using the current official minimum wage. Use this instead of computing by hand.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| years | Yes | Years of service (may be fractional). | |
| monthly_wage | Yes | Monthly wage in Toman. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose a key behavioral trait—that it uses the 'current official minimum wage'—which is valuable. However, it does not mention output format, assumptions, or edge cases, leaving significant gaps.
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 concise sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose with specificity, and the second gives a usage directive. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail, making it highly efficient and well-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?
The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain what the tool returns. It does not mention the return value (e.g., total amount in Toman) nor any assumptions or limitations. For a calculation tool, this is a significant gap, leaving the agent underinformed about the result.
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 provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters ('Years of service (may be fractional)' and 'Monthly wage in Toman'). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, 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 uses the specific verb 'Calculate' and clearly identifies the resource as 'Iranian employee's end-of-service entitlements' under 'قانون کار', listing components (حق سنوات، عیدی، مانده مرخصی). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like calculate_tax or calculate_diyeh, making the purpose unambiguous.
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 provides clear context by specifying the target (Iranian employee) and the legal framework (قانون کار), and it explicitly advises using this tool 'instead of computing by hand.' However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, so it falls short of a full 5.
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 specific legal calculation, lookup, or search source. The calculate_* tools each cover a distinct statutory computation (e.g., delay penalty vs. diyeh vs. mahrieh), the lookup_* tools are for direct retrieval of known items, and the search_* tools are split by source type (law, case law, opinions, circulars). While lookup_annual_rate and search_circular both touch rates, their descriptions clearly separate direct database retrieval from full-text search, so misselection is unlikely.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: calculate_* for computations, lookup_* for direct retrieval, and search_* for full-text search. There are no camelCase or mixed-style names, making the set highly predictable.
Nineteen tools is slightly above the typical well-scoped range of 3-15, but the server covers a large legal domain with many distinct calculation types and research sources. Each tool earns its place given the breadth of Iranian law, though the number may feel a bit heavy.
The toolset covers statutory calculations (10), specific-article lookup and procedural lookups (5), and full-text search across laws, case law, advisory opinions, and circulars (4). This spans the essential needs of Iranian legal research—computing amounts, finding article text, checking deadlines/sentences/limitations, and finding authoritative interpretations—with no obvious dead ends.