US Take-Home Pay Calculator

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses coverage (federal, state, FICA, state-specific extras), pre-tax deductions, per-paycheck breakdown, example input, tax year, and a disclaimer about estimates. It does not mention if the tool is read-only, but as a calculator this is implicit.

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 a single paragraph with several sentences, no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the primary action. Some bullet-point structuring could improve scannability, but it remains concise.

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 outlines what the tool computes and includes an example input, but without an output schema, it does not describe the return structure (e.g., named fields, per-paycheck items). For a calculator returning detailed breakdowns, this is a notable gap.

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 context by listing the tax components and mentioning pre-tax deductions, but the parameter descriptions in the schema are already detailed. The extra value is moderate.

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 specifies a precise verb ('Computes net take-home pay') and resource ('US W-2 employee'), lists covered taxes and deductions, and inherently distinguishes from siblings (self-employment and capital gains taxes).

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 clearly defines the tool's scope (W-2 employees, 2026 tax year) and lists what it includes, which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use it.

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