ziwei_liunian

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes return fields but does not disclose any side effects, limitations (e.g., maximum year range), or required external context (e.g., that birth data is used to compute the base chart). The tool appears to be read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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: a single sentence stating purpose, followed by a bullet list of returned fields. Every element adds value, and there is no extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the main action.

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 the complexity of 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic output but lacks context on how to interpret the results (e.g., meaning of 流年四化) or how this tool fits into the larger Zi Wei Dou Shu workflow. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 100% for all 11 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to parameters beyond what is already in the schema; it only lists output fields. Therefore, it does not improve parameter 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 it returns a '紫微流年列表' (Ziwei annual flow list) for a specified year range, listing specific fields like year, Gan-Zhi, and stars. This distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on daily (liuri), monthly (liuyue), or decade (daxian) periods, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 states it is '用于分析多年运势趋势' (used for analyzing multi-year fortune trends), implying its use for trend analysis. However, it does not explicitly indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like ziwei_liuri or ziwei_liuyue, or any prerequisites like needing a natal chart first.

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