Dreamspell (Argüelles 1990)

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world). The description adds non-obvious behavioral context: endpoint, required input, and cost (10 credits, Tier 1), which helps the agent budget and route. It doesn't elaborate further behavior, but the annotation bar is low.

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?

Front-loads the output description, then the sibling distinction, then compact metadata tags. Efficient and scannable; the bracketed metadata is slightly noisy but earns its place with cost and required-input info.

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 covering return values and annotations covering safety, the description is complete enough to invoke correctly. The only residual gap is disambiguating which date to use, which is minor for a calendar lookup.

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?

Only one parameter (date) with 0% schema description coverage; the schema supplies the YYYY-MM-DD pattern, and the description merely repeats '[Required: date]'. It doesn't clarify what date to supply (birth/event/current) or timezone, so it adds little meaning 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 operation (compute Dreamspell kin for a date) and specifies the return contents: kin (1-260) + tone + seal. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the traditional Tzolkin sibling, so an agent can tell which Mayan-calendar tool to pick.

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?

'Distinct from traditional Tzolkin' hints at the routing decision between this and the Tzolkin tool, but it never explicitly says when to use Dreamspell vs. Tzolkin, nor names the sibling tool. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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