divine_get_sun_moon

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description does not need to repeat safety traits. The description adds that the tool returns sunrise/sunset/moonrise/moonset times and 'related astronomical data', but does not disclose details like timezone handling or the optional language behavior.

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 short sentences that front-load the core purpose and then summarize outputs. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

The description provides a basic overview, and the output schema plus annotations cover return values and safety. However, it lacks explicit usage guidance, parameter rationale, and differentiation from closely related astronomical Panchang tools, so it is not fully complete for correct tool selection and invocation.

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?

Given the reported schema description coverage of 0%, the description needed to compensate for missing parameter context, but it only mentions 'date and location'. It does not clarify required components like day/month/year, lat/lon, tzone, or the optional language field, leaving the agent to rely on the nested schema without top-level parameter guidance.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: retrieving sun and moon rise/set timings for a specific date and location, and names the exact outputs (sunrise, sunset, moonrise, moonset). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like divine_get_month_sunrise_sunset_list, which returns a monthly list rather than a single date/location query.

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 phrase 'for a given date and location' implies when to use this tool, and it is implicitly distinct from monthly list tools. However, there is no explicit guidance about alternatives, such as divine_get_panchang or divine_get_month_sunrise_sunset_list, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the required schema fields.

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