liuyao_basic

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the tool's behavior: it takes yao values and date/time, returns a Markdown chart with many elements. It explains the meaning of yao values (6=old yin moving, etc.) and input order (bottom to top). No contradictions or omissions regarding side effects, but it doesn't mention error handling or performance constraints.

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 well-structured with bullet points listing output components and yao value explanations. It is concise enough, though the enum values are repeated from the schema. The front-loaded purpose sentence is clear.

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 thoroughly explains the return values (all chart components) and input semantics. It covers the yao values, order, and date parameters. This is comprehensive for a complex divination tool.

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%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the yao value meanings (6/7/8/9) and the bottom-to-top order beyond the schema descriptions. It also notes the output format (Markdown), which aids understanding.

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: '六爻排盤（基礎排盤）' (Six Yao Charting - Basic). It lists the specific components returned (本卦/變卦, 六親, 六神, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like bazi, ziwei, etc., which are different Chinese divination systems.

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 explains that the tool is used to generate a complete Six Yao chart from yao values and a starting time. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide direct alternatives. The sibling tools list implies differentiation, but no clear guidance on choosing between them.

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