Spouse Palace (Fuqi)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-schema facts — the POST endpoint and a 5-credit cost — but says nothing about what the response contains or whether interpretation text versus raw palace data is returned.

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?

It is short and front-loads the topic sentence, and the bracketed metadata block is compact and scannable. However, the brevity comes at the cost of substance — the space saved is not used to explain what the tool actually produces.

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-value detail is not required, and cost plus endpoint are disclosed. Still missing is the crucial framing that this is a natal-chart-derived palace analysis requiring birth date (and optionally time/timezone), which an agent needs in order to supply correct inputs.

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 coverage is only 50%: timezone and timezoneOffset are documented in-schema, while date and time carry only regex patterns with no explanation. The description's "Required: date" restates the schema's required list and adds nothing about format, timezone resolution, or how date/time feed the chart.

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?

"Marriage partner, romantic union" names the subject matter but not the operation — it never says the tool computes/returns the Zi Wei spouse palace from birth data. The title and sibling list (palace_career, palace_wealth, etc.) make the resource domain inferable, but the description itself reads as a topic label rather than a tool purpose.

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 statement of when to call this instead of astroway_ziwei_chart, astroway_ziwei_twelve_palaces, or the other palace tools. The only routing hints are the [Group: Zi Wei Dou Shu] tag and the endpoint path, which require the agent to infer usage from taxonomy rather than prose.

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