기업업무추진비 한도

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive behavior, and closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the calculation basis—basic limit based on SME status and fiscal-year months, and a revenue-based limit including 10% related-party transactions—but does not explain how optional parameters such as spent or passiveCompany affect the result.

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 two focused sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by the key calculation factors.

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 seven-parameter tax calculator with no output schema, the description explains the core calculation and names the main factors. It leaves some gaps around optional-parameter behavior, especially spent and passiveCompany, and the exact output structure is only implied by '한도와 한도초과액'.

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 high at 86%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful relationships: it connects sme and months to the basic limit, and revenue and relatedRevenue to the revenue-based limit with a 10% related-party rate. It does not mention passiveCompany or clarify the optional spent parameter's effect, so it is not fully comprehensive.

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, '계산합니다' (calculates), and a precise resource, '법인의 기업업무추진비(접대비) 손금 한도와 한도초과액'. It also scopes the calculation to SME status, fiscal-year months, and related-party revenue, which clearly distinguishes it from broader sibling tools such as estimate_tax.

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 states what the tool calculates but gives no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like estimate_tax or estimate_penalty. It also provides no prerequisites, exclusions, or when-not-to-use conditions.

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