bazi_liunian

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses what the tool does: it returns a list of annual data with specified fields for a given year range. There are no side effects or destructive actions implied, and the output structure is clearly outlined. This meets the burden for transparency.

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 extremely concise, using a short paragraph with a bullet list for output fields. Every sentence adds value, and the key information is front-loaded. No unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (year, gan-zhi, age, dayun). It covers the core functionality for analyzing yearly trends. However, it omits details about how optional parameters like longitude or isLunar affect the output, which could be added for 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 baseline is 3. The description does not add new meaning beyond the schema; it only summarizes the input (e.g., 'startYear/endYear' are mentioned). No extra detail on how parameters affect computation is provided.

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 '流年信息' (annual fortune info) for a year range, listing specific fields (公历年份, 干支年, 虚岁, 所属大运). This distinguishes it from siblings like bazi_dayun (period luck) and bazi_liuri (daily luck) by focusing on yearly analysis over a range.

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 '用于分析多年运势趋势' (used for analyzing multi-year trends), indicating when to use it. However, it does not mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like bazi_dayun, leaving some ambiguity for an AI agent.

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