Return the canonical list of 26 ancient divination systems Mythsensus implements (slug, English + Thai name, region, required inputs). Use first when asked "what systems do you support?".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the output structure (slug, English and Thai name, region, required inputs) and the 'canonical' nature of the list, which is transparent. It does not explicitly state side effects, but for a list/read tool this is not a significant gap.
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 sentence that front-loads the main action and return value, followed by explicit usage guidance. It contains no fluff or redundant information; every word contributes to understanding.
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, zero-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It specifies the purpose, the exact content of the returned list, and when to use it. Sibling tools cover deeper details, so no additional context is needed.
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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it correctly avoids adding irrelevant parameter information. It mentions 'required inputs' as an output field, which is fine.
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 returns the canonical list of 26 divination systems, identifying the resource (Mythensus systems) and the action (list). It also differentiates from siblings by specifying the content fields and the primary use case, making it distinct from tools like get_system_rules or get_deity_lore.
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 says 'Use first when asked "what systems do you support?"' which provides a clear when-to-use condition. However, it does not mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it falls short of the highest bar for usage guidelines.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: engine metadata, score calculation, daily draw, system-specific reading, deity lore, system rules, and system list. No two tools overlap in purpose, and descriptions clearly delineate boundaries.
The majority of tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (calculate_, get_, list_), but two deviate: 'about_mythsensus_engine' uses a preposition and 'daily_blessing' is an adjective_noun phrase. This minor inconsistency is easy to parse but breaks the otherwise uniform convention.
Seven tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and each covers a meaningful aspect of the divination domain without redundancy. The count feels appropriately scoped for the server's purpose.
The tool surface covers the full user journey: list systems, query rules, calculate score, get deep readings, look up deities, and draw daily blessings, plus engine transparency. There are no obvious gaps or dead ends; the domain appears fully served.
