sg_salary_benchmark

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses data source (MyCareersFuture, live, not self-reported), nature (real employer-posted), and cost (FREE). Missing details like rate limits or update frequency, but overall transparent.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Action verb 'Benchmark' is front-loaded. Every word adds value.

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?

Description is adequate for a simple lookup tool, but lacks details about output format (e.g., JSON structure, exact percentile fields). With no output schema, more explicit expectations would improve completeness.

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%, so parameters are already described. Description does not add extra meaning beyond schema (e.g., role as job title, limit as max listings). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool benchmarks salary for a Singapore role using live government job portal data. It specifies outputs (median, percentile ranges, annual equivalents) and highlights differentiation from self-reported data. No sibling tools overlap, making it distinct.

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?

Context is clear: use for Singapore salary benchmarking. No explicit when-not or alternatives given, but no sibling salary tools exist. Guidance is adequate for the tool's unique function.

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