calculate_retirement_date

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return shape and the reliance on legal retirement ages, which is adequate for a simple calculator. However, it omits potential side effects, limitations (e.g., simplified ages), or how edge cases like already retired are handled.

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 extremely concise, using two sentences to convey purpose, inputs, output structure, and pointer to related tools. It is front-loaded with the core action and wastes no words.

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 simple lookup tool with two parameters and a clear output, the description is largely complete. It explains inputs, expected return object, and provides a hint to related bundles. The lack of detailed output schema is mitigated by the description of the return shape, and no further context seems necessary for this 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions including enum values for country. The description adds no additional parameter details but clarifies the output structure, which adds marginal value. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as schema handles parameter semantics.

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's function: estimating retirement date from birth date and country. It uses specific verbs ('estimate') and specifies the resource (retirement date). However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like calculate_retirement_pension, though it hints at related calculators via list_bundles.

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 implies the tool is for basic retirement date estimation but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., calculate_retirement_pension). The reference to list_bundles for 'temps-rh' calculators is vague and does not specify exclusions or comparisons.

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