Get the Sri Lanka payroll reference

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by specifying what data is returned (APIT, EPF, ETF, stamp-duty), that it is maintained, and that sources and scope limits are included—context 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes meaningful information: the verb, the specific data categories, and the qualifying details about sources and scope.

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 no parameters, an existing output schema, and simple read-only behavior, the description is sufficient. It covers the purpose, content, and key qualifiers (maintained, official sources, scope limits), leaving detailed return structure to the output schema.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter meaning and appropriately remains silent on this front.

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 with a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('maintained APIT, EPF, ETF, and stamp-duty assumptions'), and adds context about official sources and scope limits. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like calculate_sri_lanka_payslip and get_sri_lanka_payslip_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 implies usage (when you need reference assumptions) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or sibling tools. It provides clear context but lacks explicit guidance on selection.

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