Puer — Boy

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

Annotations already indicate read-only safety. The description adds no behavioral context (e.g., what input fields are required, how results are structured). The example empty body offers some insight but is too minimal.

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 brief and front-loaded with the figure's meaning. It avoids redundancy, but the brevity comes at the cost of clarity.

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?

With no output schema and a free-form body parameter, the description fails to specify return value structure or input format requirements. This is insufficient for safe 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description notes 'Raw JSON body' and points to the example, but does not clarify expected properties or constraints beyond the schema.

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 a vague interpretation of the figure ('Young man, energy, impulse') but does not state what the tool actually does (e.g., retrieve, interpret, or compute). It does not distinguish it from the many sibling geomancy tools.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus other geomancy figures. The group label is present but does not help the agent choose among alternatives.

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