payroll.kr_year_end_tax_settlement

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior. The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond annotations: simplified model nature, step-by-step tax calculation, truncation below 1 won, comparison with prepaid tax, and the rule matching tax.kr_comprehensive_income_tax.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by calculation details, rounding behavior, and dependency routing. Every sentence conveys necessary information without redundancy.

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?

For a complex tax calculation tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the core model, rounding, and cross-tool dependencies well. It is slightly incomplete on optional parameters such as as_of and include_proposed, and on the meaning of year.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for annual_gross, prepaid_tax, dependents, extra_deductions, and extra_tax_credits, but does not explain year, as_of, or include_proposed, and gives no format guidance for amount strings.

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 states a specific verb and resource: compute year-end settlement refund or additional payment. It also distinguishes the tool from related tax tools by noting the same rounding rule as tax.kr_comprehensive_income_tax and by directing medical/education/donation items to their own tools.

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?

It clearly explains that medical expenses, education expenses, and donations must be computed separately and passed in via extra_* fields, which routes the agent to sibling tools. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or contrast it with a full year-end settlement alternative, but the context is clear.

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