calculate_overtime_fr

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

With no annotations, the description partially fulfills the burden by stating it returns gross overtime pay with 25%/50% premiums. It does not disclose other potential behaviors like rounding, edge cases, or limitations, but it is adequate for a simple calculation tool.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and contains no extraneous information. Every sentence is meaningful and efficient.

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 presence of an output schema and full parameter coverage, the description provides sufficient context: purpose, usage, inputs, output structure, and a reference to related tools. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying that 'normal hours' (base_hours) and 'overtime hours' (inferred from actual_hours) are used, which aids understanding 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 clearly states the tool computes French overtime pay, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'calculate_overtime_pay_fr', which appears to have a similar purpose.

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 suggests use for HR or employee verification, providing context. However, it does not offer explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, such as the similar sibling 'calculate_overtime_pay_fr'.

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