get_salary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals a critical non-obvious behavior: INR values are in lakhs and other currencies in thousands. This adds significant transparency beyond a generic 'get salary' description and helps the agent interpret results correctly.

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 concise and well-structured: the first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second sentence provides an essential, clearly marked IMPORTANT note about currency units. Every sentence serves a purpose with no 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?

Given there is no output schema, the description must explain the return structure and any non-obvious formatting. It does both by listing components (base, stocks, bonus, total compensation) and explaining the unit convention for INR versus other currencies. This is complete for a zero-parameter read tool.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters; instead, it adds value by clarifying output unit semantics, which is indirectly helpful for understanding the tool's behavior even though it is not parameter-specific.

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 retrieves 'your current salary/compensation details including base, stocks, bonus, and total compensation.' This distinguishes it from siblings like update_salary, which handles modifications, by the explicit 'Get' verb and resource specification.

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?

No explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The verb 'Get' implies read-only usage, but the description does not mention update_salary or provide any 'use instead' language. The currency interpretation note is useful for data handling but does not address tool selection.

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