calculate_salary_hourly_to_annual

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

The description claims the tool can convert to 'gross or net' salary, but the input schema does not include any parameter for gross/net selection, creating a discrepancy. Additionally, no annotations exist to clarify the tool's behavior or constraints, leaving the agent uncertain about the actual functionality.

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 highly concise, with two front-loaded sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose, inputs, outputs, and related resources. No extraneous information is present.

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?

The description covers the main outputs (weekly, monthly, annual) and usage context, but it omits default values for hours_per_week and weeks_per_year, and fails to clarify the unresolved gross/net ambiguity. Given the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the parameters are well-documented. The description merely restates the inputs without adding new semantic details. The mention of 'gross or net' is redundant and inconsistent with the schema, providing no useful additional meaning.

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 converts hourly wage to monthly and annual salary, distinguishing it as a generic converter for job comparisons. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from region-specific salary calculators like 'calculate_belgian_salary' or 'calculate_french_salary', which could cause ambiguity.

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 mentions 'Use for job comparisons' and directs to 'list_bundles' for related calculators, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or specify scenarios where other salary calculators (e.g., those with tax deductions) would be more appropriate.

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