fortune_bazi

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses inputs and outputs but does not mention side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. As a calculation tool, it is likely 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 a single concise sentence (in Chinese) that effectively communicates purpose and outputs with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the tool's name and purpose.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (four pillars, five elements, etc.). It covers the main functionality for a fortune-telling tool. Slight lack of detail on output format, but acceptable.

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 the baseline is 3. The description mentions inputs (birth date and gender) but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema descriptions. It repeats what is already evident from the parameter descriptions.

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 specifies the verb '推算' (calculate) and the resource '八字排盘' (Ba Zi chart), and lists the outputs (four pillars, five elements, day master analysis, today's fortune), distinguishing it from sibling fortune tools.

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 implies usage for Ba Zi fortune calculation but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., fortune_qian, fortune_name). No context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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