ZR from Spirit

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds minimal context ('career/action periods') but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as impact on data or authentication needs. Annotations do the heavy lifting.

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 brief (two lines plus group and example). It is front-loaded with purpose but lacks structure. The example is incomplete and not fully informative. Could be more organized.

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?

Given the specialized nature of Zodiacal Releasing, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the concept, output format, or limitations. No output schema exists, so the description should provide more context about what the result contains.

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% with property descriptions for 'body' (chart data and years). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, only a generic example. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents parameters well.

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 computes Zodiacal Releasing from the Lot of Spirit for career/action periods. The title and tool name reinforce this. It distinguishes from sibling tools like hellenistic_brennan_zodiacal_releasing_fortune (Lot of Fortune) and hellenistic_brennan_zr_loosing_of_bond.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not compare with other ZR tools or time-lord methods, nor does it specify prerequisites or context of use.

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