Salary reports

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive open-world lookup. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: about 200 reports, one per specialty and seniority, and the title format agents can expect.

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 short, front-loaded, and free of repetition. It moves efficiently from what the tool lists to when to use it to what to call next.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining what comes back. It does that at a useful level by saying there are about 200 reports and each has a title like "salary of senior Java developer in 1405", though it does not enumerate returned fields.

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%, so search, seniority, and pagination semantics are already documented in the input schema. The description adds only light context about report slugs and specialty filtering, without meaningfully expanding parameter interpretation beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: list IranTalent salary reports, one per job specialty and seniority level. It also names the source domain and distinguishes the tool from it_salary by explaining that this tool lists reports while it_salary returns the figures.

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 explicitly says to use this first for questions like "how much does a X earn in Iran" and then use it_salary with the report slug or specialty to get figures. That gives clear when-to-use guidance and a concrete alternative.

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