Arabic Parts (Lots)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds that it returns positions and mentions a credit cost, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as rate limits or required permissions. Value added is minimal beyond annotations.

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 short and includes a metadata group and cost. However, the example request is inconsistent with the schema, and the lack of parameter guidance makes it less useful. It could be more informative without adding much length.

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 tool with 11 parameters, no output schema, and zero parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain how to specify custom lots, the role of zodiac type, or the output structure. The example mismatch further reduces completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters but fails. The example includes a 'lots' array not present in the input schema, creating contradiction. Parameters like zodiacType and ayanamsaId are not explained, leaving critical ambiguity.

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 states the tool calculates Arabic parts (Lots) from a natal chart and returns positions for standard and custom lots. However, it does not differentiate from specialized sibling tools like hellenistic_brennan_lots_15 or hellenistic_greenbaum_lot_of_eros_detail, which may cause confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to conditions, leaving the agent to guess based on tool name alone.

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