gus_get_average_salary

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the entire burden. It correctly implies a read-only data retrieval operation, but does not disclose whether it requires authentication, rate limits, or data freshness (e.g., if only one year is available). It's adequate but not thorough.

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 concise sentence that clearly communicates the purpose. It is front-loaded but uses a non-standard term 'Pobierz' which may or may not be universally understood; however, it's efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no nested objects, has output schema), the description is mostly adequate. However, it could mention that the output schema exists and note any regional coverage limitations (e.g., only for Polish voivodeships). The context signals show low complexity, so a moderate score is fair.

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 100% (one parameter 'year' with default and Polish description). The description adds 'domyślnie 2023' which is already in the schema default, and does not provide additional meaning beyond that. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb 'Pobierz' (download/get) and clearly states the resource: 'przeciętne miesięczne wynagrodzenie brutto dla województw z GUS BDL'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which retrieve population, unemployment, or search variables/companies.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It doesn't state any prerequisites, limitations, or when it would be inappropriate compared to other tools like 'gus_get_unemployment_rate' or 'gus_search_variable'.

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