TeamPredict HR Calculators

Employee turnover cost

employee_turnover_cost

Read-onlyIdempotent

Estimate what employee turnover costs a company per year, and how much cutting turnover would save. Use it when you know headcount, average salary and the annual turnover rate and want the dollar cost of people leaving. Use employee_turnover_rate instead to work out the turnover rate itself from headcounts and leavers, and cost_of_a_bad_hire for the cost of one specific failed hire. Returns departures per year, cost per departure, total annual cost and the yearly saving from a given cut in turnover. Same formula as the TeamPredict turnover cost calculator.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`employees`	Yes	Number of employees (headcount), a whole number from 1 to 1,000,000.
`average_salary_usd`	Yes	Average annual salary per employee, in US dollars. For example 70000.
`target_reduction_points`	No	Percentage points of annual turnover you want to cut, for the savings figure. Capped at the turnover rate. Default 3.
`annual_turnover_rate_percent`	Yes	Share of employees who leave in a year, as a percentage from 0 to 100. 15 means 15%.
`replacement_cost_percent_of_salary`	No	What replacing one person costs, as a percentage of their annual salary. 50 means half a year of pay, which is the calculator's default; published estimates range from about 30 to 200.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`inputs`	Yes	The inputs as used, with defaults filled in.
`results`	Yes	The computed numbers. Unavailable numbers are null.
`summary`	Yes	One or two plain sentences with the headline numbers.
`calculator_url`	Yes	The TeamPredict calculator page that shows the same calculation, where a person can change the inputs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it frames the result as an estimate, describes the savings calculation, names the default replacement-cost assumption implicitly, and cites the underlying formula source. Return formatting is left to the output schema.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and follows with usage and alternatives in a logical order. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary because the return-value sentence partially duplicates the output schema, but no sentence is redundant or confusing.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity, rich input schema, output schema, and safety annotations, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage conditions, alternatives, savings semantics, and formula provenance, leaving no critical gap for an agent to call it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters and their defaults/ranges are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the input concepts (headcount, average salary, annual turnover rate) and explains that the savings figure comes from a given cut in turnover, but it does not add syntax or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description uses a specific verb and resource ("Estimate what employee turnover costs a company per year") and explicitly distinguishes itself from employee_turnover_rate and cost_of_a_bad_hire. An agent can identify this tool's role without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It states the exact conditions for use ("when you know headcount, average salary and the annual turnover rate and want the dollar cost") and names the two sibling alternatives with their respective purposes. This is explicit when-to-use and 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.

All TeamPredict HR Calculators tools Inspect

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

Need Help?