Fortuna Minor

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, and an output schema exists. The description adds useful operational context not present in annotations: the endpoint and the cost of 10 credits (Tier 1). It does not describe the response content, but the output schema covers that.

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 front-loaded, with structured metadata tags for group, endpoint, and cost. It avoids waste, though the opening sentence is too terse to carry the 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 zero parameters, an output schema, and rich annotations, the main missing piece is a clear statement of what the tool actually does and when to choose this geomancy figure over its siblings. The cost and endpoint metadata help, but the core purpose remains ambiguous for an agent selecting among many similar tools.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not a concern. The description does not need to compensate for any missing parameter information.

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 'Lesser Fortune: quick gains' simply translates the tool's title and name rather than stating what the tool does. It does not say whether this returns a geomancy figure interpretation, a reading, or a symbolic lookup, and it fails to distinguish the tool from the many sibling geomancy figure 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as astroway_geomancy_fortuna_major or the other geomancy figures. No context, exclusions, or selection criteria are provided.

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