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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by indicating a calculation ('Converts') with no side effects. It adds value by detailing the output (annual + monthly net, deduction breakdown, data year) and emphasizing deterministic rules (no AI), which goes beyond the annotations.

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 efficient, with a clear lead sentence, a translated version, and a concise explanation of method and outputs. It is slightly verbose due to bilingual text but still well-organized and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 complexity of Swiss payroll and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return format and the payroll components. It lacks edge-case details (e.g., salary caps) but is sufficient for an agent to understand scope and results.

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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description enriches parameter meaning by listing the specific deductions (AVS/AI/APG, AC, LPP, NBU) and tying them to the canton, which clarifies how canton and age affect the calculation beyond the schema's brief statements.

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: converting a gross annual Swiss salary to net for cross-border workers, with a specific verb ('converts') and resource ('gross salary to net'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like rent or tenant tools by focusing on salary and cross-border context.

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 implicitly indicates usage for cross-border workers in specific cantons, and mentions deterministic rules, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or exclusions. Context is clear, but no direct when-not guidance.

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