calculate_night_shift_pay

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return format {night_hourly_rate, total_pay, premium_earned}, but does not mention any behavioral traits such as potential rounding, precision, or that it is a pure calculation (read-only). With no annotations, more transparency would be expected.

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 sentences: first states purpose and parameters, second states return structure and related tool. Every sentence is essential, and the core action is front-loaded.

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 low complexity (3 parameters, all described, output structure listed in description), the description is nearly complete. It provides purpose, parameters, and return format. Slight gap: no example or note about accepted currencies.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it only lists the return fields.

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 verb 'Calculate', the resource 'night shift pay', and the scope '21h-6h with configurable premium percentage'. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like calculate_overtime_pay_fr by specifying the time range.

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 a hint to 'See list_bundles for related 'temps-rh' calculators', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it give clear usage context or exclusions.

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