Personal Year

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, and the description reinforces this by saying 'Looks up' and 'server-side'. It does not mention rate limits or auth, but the key non-mutating nature is well covered by both annotations and description.

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 structured with clear WORKFLOW, INPUT CONTRACT, and DO NOT CONFUSE WITH sections. It is slightly verbose and repeats some information, but the organization aids scanning and no sentence is purely filler.

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 there is an output schema (true), the description does not need to detail return fields. It explains the input contract, the auto-selected year, the output format options, and relationship to related tools, making it sufficiently complete for correct 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?

Schema covers all three parameters with descriptions. The description adds useful semantics: name letters are converted to numerology values, date defaults to today, response_format has markdown/json options, and only month/day are used for the calculation. Minor ambiguity remains about whether the full date year is ignored, but overall extra context is provided.

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 ('Looks up') and a clear resource ('Personal Year theme'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like asterwise_get_numerology_profile and asterwise_get_varshaphal. The purpose is immediately unambiguous.

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?

Provides a recommended workflow ('BEFORE: RECOMMENDED — asterwise_get_numerology_profile'), clarifies it uses the current calendar cycle, and notes it is not a Vedic varshaphal. It implies when to use it but does not explicitly state all exclusion cases, though the DO NOT CONFUSE WITH section covers the most likely alternatives.

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