Calculate a Sri Lanka payslip

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

Annotations already mark it as readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by using 'Estimate' to signal approximate results and 'regular primary employment' to limit scope. There is no contradiction with 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 a single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the action and lists all key outputs. There is zero fluff—every phrase earns its place.

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?

With a full input schema, output schema, and safe annotations, the description only needs to convey purpose and scope, which it does well. It lacks explicit mention of assumptions (e.g., tax year, latest rates) but those are likely captured in the output schema, making it adequately complete for this complexity.

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?

Input schema descriptions cover 100% of the 3 parameters (grossSalary, epfEtfEarningsBase, otherEmployeeDeductions), so the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail, keeping the score at the baseline of 3.

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 starts with 'Estimate' (specific verb) and names the exact resource: monthly APIT/PAYE, EPF, ETF, stamp duty, net pay, and employer cost. This clearly differentiates it from the sibling tools (get_sri_lanka_payroll_reference and get_sri_lanka_payslip_checklist) by focusing on calculation rather than reference or checklist.

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 'regular primary employment in Sri Lanka', implying it is for standard single-job monthly payroll. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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