Get lunar calendar - Moon phases for entire month

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds that the result is 'complete' month coverage with illumination values, which is mild scoping context, but says nothing about rate limits, coverage gaps, or return shape. Adequate given annotations, not rich.

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?

Two sentences, both front-loaded with the core capability first and the use cases second. The second sentence leans promotional but does carry some routing value; no wasted preamble.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering the safety profile, the description need not explain return values. Year/month scope, illumination inclusion and a language-capable schema cover what an agent needs; only the when-vs-sibling guidance is thin.

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% – year range, month 1-12, lang enum and compact mode are all documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already carries, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get') and resource ('complete lunar calendar showing moon phase and illumination') and pins the scope to 'every day of a specific month'. That scope clause is what separates it from the sibling single-point tools get_astrology_moon_phase_current and get_astrology_moon_phase_upcoming without opening either schema.

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 second sentence gives use cases ('moon phase calendars, lunar planners, astrology event schedules'), which implies when the tool is appropriate, but it never states when to prefer it over get_astrology_moon_phase_current/upcoming or names any alternative. Usage is implied rather than prescribed.

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