Expression / Destiny (kabbalistic)

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

Annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world call, so the description doesn't need to reassert safety. It adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the exact endpoint, the mandatory parameter pair, and a concrete cost of 10 credits at Tier 1, which matters for an agent budgeting calls.

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 core sentence is front-loaded and wastes nothing, and the bracketed metadata lines are compact routing information rather than filler. Slightly redundant to restate the group name that the tool name already encodes.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the operation is a pure calculation with no side effects. The only meaningful gap is the unexplained `date` parameter and the unstated distinction from the 'strict' Kabbalistic expression sibling.

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 carry parameter meaning. It clarifies that `name` should be the full birth name and that all letters count, but it never explains what role `date` plays in an expression-number calculation, leaving one of two required parameters semantically opaque.

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 and resource ("Calculate the Expression (Destiny) number") plus the exact input basis ("full birth name letters (all letters, reduced)") and the system ("Kabbalistic (phonetic)"). It clearly separates itself from the Chaldean/Pythagorean/Vedic siblings by naming the system, though it never explicitly contrasts with the adjacent 'strict' variant, which uses a different letter mapping.

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 system label implies when to pick this over Pythagorean or Chaldean expression tools, but the description never states that selection rule outright or gives any exclusions. Required inputs and credit cost are listed, but no guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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