퇴직금 계산기 (무료)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the calculation formula and labels the result as '예상' (estimated), which is helpful. However, it doesn't mention assumptions such as the default 90-day period, rounding, or potential discrepancies from actual legal severance pay calculations.

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 that includes the formula and required inputs. It avoids unnecessary words and communicates the essential information efficiently.

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 simple calculator with three well-documented parameters and a numeric output, the description is mostly complete. It provides the formula and inputs, but lacks an explicit disclaimer about legal accuracy or guidance on when to use the optional '최근3개월_일수' parameter, which would make it fully self-contained.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds the formula that connects them, but it doesn't add extra syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 function: calculate estimated severance pay using a specific formula (1-day average wage × 30 days × years of service). It names the exact inputs (근속연수 and 최근 3개월 급여합계) and uses a specific verb (계산), distinguishing it from sibling calculator 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?

The description provides clear context: this is a calculator for severance pay estimation. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous given the tool's name and title, and the inclusion of the standard formula makes the use case evident.

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