Laetitia — Joy

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

Annotations declare read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and closed-world behavior, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond these. It does not disclose return type, output format, or any side effects.

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 description is very short (three lines), which is concise, but it sacrifices completeness. Every sentence earns its place but omits critical information.

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?

The description fails to explain what the tool returns or how to interpret its output. With no output schema and a sparse description, the agent lacks essential context for effective use.

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?

The single 'body' parameter is described as 'Raw JSON body — see the example in the tool description for required fields,' but the example is '{}', implying no required fields. Schema coverage is 100% but the description adds no meaningful constraints or format expectations.

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 provides only thematic keywords ('Happiness, optimism, healing') without a verb or action. It does not state what the tool does (e.g., 'Returns an interpretation of the Laetitia figure'), making it vague. The title and group hint at geomancy but not a specific operation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., other geomancy figures). The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without selection criteria.

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