self_employment_tax

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful information that the tool calculates both the SE tax and the deductible half, which clarifies output semantics. No contradictions found.

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 redundant words. It fully defines the tool's purpose in under 10 words.

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 is simple with one input and no output schema, but the description only partially reveals the return structure (tax and deductible half). It does not specify exact field names or any limitations, such as tax year or wage base assumptions, which could be important for an agent.

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 has 100% coverage with one parameter 'net_self_employment_income' described as 'Net profit from self-employment'. The description does not add additional detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score 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 clearly states a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('self-employment tax and deductible half for Schedule SE'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like us_income_tax_estimate by explicitly targeting SE tax and Schedule SE.

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?

Usage context is implied: use when you need SE tax calculation. However, there is no explicit mention of when not to use it or alternative tools, such as us_income_tax_estimate, so guidance is not fully explicit.

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