Look up a birth city and return coordinates and an IANA timezone.
Plan: Free or higher · Cost: 0.1 credits per call.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes | ||
| country_code | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions the output (coordinates, timezone) and cost, but omits side effects, auth needs, rate limits, or behavior on error. It is somewhat transparent but incomplete.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant information.
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?
Although an output schema exists (so return values need not be explained), the description lacks parameter explanations, usage guidelines, and behavioral details. With three parameters and no schema descriptions, the tool is under-documented.
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 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It only mentions 'birth city' (likely mapping to 'query') but does not explain 'limit' or 'country_code'. The description adds no meaningful parameter understanding beyond the schema's field names.
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's purpose: 'Look up a birth city and return coordinates and an IANA timezone.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the context signals show siblings are unrelated (calculations), so it is well-distinguished.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description only states what the tool does, not when to invoke it.
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 type of calculation (bodygraph, composite, dreamrave, penta, transit, location search) with no overlap, making it easy for an agent to select the correct one.
Most tools follow a 'calculate_' pattern, but 'get_transit' and 'search_locations' break the pattern, introducing inconsistency. While the verbs are descriptive, the lack of uniformity may confuse agents.
With 6 tools, the server is well-scoped for a Human Design calculation API—covering all major chart types and a helper function without superfluous tools.
The tool set covers all primary Human Design calculations (individual, composite, dreamrave, penta, transit) and location lookup. Missing are tools for interpreting or persisting results, but core calculations are complete.
