get_chakra_frequenciesReturns the seven Solfeggio chakra frequencies with musical notes, colors, and affirmations. For the full guide (crystals, oils, poses, Sedona vortex) use get_chakra_guide.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chakra | No | Specific chakra — omit for all seven |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tip | No | ||
| chakras | Yes | ||
| chakra_sound_bath | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false) and adds context about return content (frequencies, notes, colors, affirmations). No contradictions.
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 short sentences with no redundant information. Every word is meaningful and front-loaded with the main purpose.
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 tool has low complexity (1 optional param, output schema given) and the description sufficiently covers what it returns and how to get more info. No gaps.
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 fully describes the single optional parameter with enum and description. The description adds no new information about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.
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 that it returns the seven Solfeggio chakra frequencies with musical notes, colors, and affirmations. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_chakra_guide by specifying what it does not cover.
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 explicitly directs the user to use get_chakra_guide for the full guide, providing clear when-to-use guidance. It implies that this tool is for basic frequency data.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Tools are mostly distinct across categories (radio, local info, spiritual, listener management), but there is notable overlap: get_emergency_alerts and get_nws_alerts both provide alerts, and get_or_create_listener overlaps with register_listener. Also, get_chakra_frequencies, get_chakra_guide, and get_solfeggio are very similar. While descriptions help differentiate, agents may still struggle to select the right tool.
All tool names consistently use lowercase snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_weather, submit_song_request, log_listener_history). The verbs are predictable (get, search, submit, log, register, update) and there are no deviations like camelCase or inconsistent verb styles.
With 45 tools, the set is overgrown for a radio station server. Many tools are hyper-specific (e.g., separate tools for chakra frequencies, guide, and solfeggio; moon phase, sun times, and stargazing conditions). Consolidating similar functions would reduce cognitive load and improve coherence.
The tool set covers a broad range: radio operations, listener management, local news/weather, outdoor guides, spiritual content, etc. However, there are notable gaps: no tool to fetch full news articles (only headlines), no way to manage show schedules, and no donation or station info tools. Also, listener profile management is split across multiple tools, which feels incomplete.