get_birthdays_on_day

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It is a read-only lookup by nature, but the description does not state that, nor does it cover failure modes (e.g., what happens for an invalid or empty day), leaving a gap for an unannotated tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter query, though it sacrifices some clarification that a slightly longer description could provide.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient; return values need not be explained because the output schema covers them. The season enum documentation gap is the main remaining hole.

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 50%: the day parameter has a documented 1-28 range, while the season enum lacks any description of its values. The description only restates the parameters at a high level and adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (查询) and resource (村民生日) scoped to a season and day, so the agent can distinguish it from the sibling get_week_birthdays at the level of time granularity. It is clear but does not explicitly name the week-level sibling as the alternative.

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 when to use it (when a specific season+day pair is known), and the sibling get_week_birthdays hints at the complement, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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