Five-Rune Cross

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, closed-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds reproducibility via seed, rune content details, cost tier, endpoint, and convention basis, though it leaves reversed-rune behavior unstated despite the allowReversed parameter.

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 layout and positions, then supplemental behavior and metadata with little waste. The metadata lines are compact and structured.

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 three-optional-parameter draw tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers what is drawn and the cost. It remains incomplete on how question and allowReversed affect the reading, which is relevant to 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 description coverage is only 33%; only seed is documented in the schema, and the description merely repeats its reproducibility. The question and allowReversed parameters receive no explanation, so an agent cannot tell how the question is used or what allowReversed changes.

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 this is a five-rune cross spread and enumerates the five positions, distinguishing it from single/three/nine-rune siblings by layout and count. There is no explicit verb, but the resource and output are 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 no when-to-use, exclusions, or alternative selection guidance. Calling out the layout as modern convention does not tell an agent when to prefer this over other rune draws.

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