paye_calculator

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Compute Kenya PAYE income tax' and adds 'DEMO,' but does not explain key behaviors such as how NHIF/NSSF options affect the calculation, what tax rates/reliefs are applied, or whether results are approximate. This is essentially no disclosure.

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 extremely concise—a single sentence followed by 'DEMO.' It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no fluff. However, the 'DEMO' tag is cryptic and could be considered unnecessary, though it does not harm the structure.

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 complexity (PAYE calculation with optional NHIF/NSSF) and the absence of annotations or parameter descriptions, the description is woefully incomplete. It does not mention what the output looks like (despite an output schema existing), any prerequisites, or tax year specifics beyond '2025.' A calculator tool needs much more context to be used safely.

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 add meaning to parameters. It does not mention 'annual_gross_income_kes', 'include_nhif', or 'include_nssf' at all. The booleans' semantics are completely unexplained, leaving the agent without clues about how these inputs influence the calculation beyond their names.

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 purpose: 'Compute Kenya PAYE income tax for 2025 tax year.' It uses a specific verb ('Compute'), identifies the resource ('Kenya PAYE income tax'), and specifies the tax year, which fully distinguishes it from the sibling guide tools. Even though 'DEMO' is added, it does not obscure the primary function.

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 tool's use is implied by its name and description as a calculator for 2025 Kenyan PAYE, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. Sibling tools are guides, so the calculation context is inferred, but no alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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