calculate_employer_cost_fr

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully explain behavior. It mentions returns employer cost and charges but does not disclose read-only nature, prerequisites, or the fact that the schema is missing a promised parameter (status).

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. However, the inclusion of a non-existent parameter detracts from correctness.

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 calculator tool with an output schema, the description should clarify the missing 'status' parameter. The mismatch between described inputs and actual schema makes the tool incomplete without explanation.

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?

The schema has one parameter with a clear description (gross_monthly: Monthly gross salary EUR). However, the description adds 'status (cadre/non-cadre)' which is not in the schema, misrepresenting the actual inputs.

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 it computes employer cost in France (gross + social charges) and mentions its use for hiring budget or salary comparison. However, it lists 'status (cadre/non-cadre)' as an input which is not in the schema, causing some confusion.

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 when to use the tool ('for hiring budget or freelance vs salary comparison') and directs to list_bundles for related calculators, providing clear alternatives.

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