Forecast Calendar

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent. The description adds cost (100 credits, Tier 4) and group (Prognostics), which are useful beyond annotations, but no details on result size, pagination, or computational behavior.

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?

Description is three sentences plus group/cost and an example. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core 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?

No output schema exists, and the description only vaguely mentions 'combined forecast calendar' without detailing the return structure, fields, or event ordering. Adequate but incomplete for full context.

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 100%. The description explains the 'natal' object with required fields and defaults, and provides an example request body. However, it does not elaborate on optional fields like 'zodiacType' or 'ayanamsaId'.

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 clearly states it generates a combined forecast calendar including transits, lunar phases, ingresses, and retrograde stations. It distinguishes from sibling tools like transit_calendar or ingresses by being combined and covering multiple event types.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., transit_calendar, ingresses). The description only mentions 'for a given period' without specifying context or exclusions.

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