Dodekatemoria

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds minimal behavioral context (tradition group) but does not contradict annotations. It does not delve into additional traits like auth requirements or rate limits, but annotations suffice.

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 (one line plus group/example), which is concise, but the example is unhelpful and the overall content lacks substance. It is not front-loaded with 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?

Given 11 parameters, no output schema, and a complex astrological concept, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what dodecatemoria are, what inputs are required, or what the output represents, leaving the agent with virtually no 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must clarify parameters, but it only offers a placeholder example '{"...chart":"..."}'. None of the 11 parameters (e.g., date, time, zodiacType) are explained, leaving the agent to guess their meaning and format.

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 states 'Dodecatemoria sub-divisions of zodiac,' clearly indicating the tool computes these astrological sub-divisions. However, it does not differentiate from the similar sibling 'hellenistic_greenbaum_duodecima' (which also deals with 12th divisions), missing an opportunity to distinguish.

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 alternatives. The description provides an example request body but lacks context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it.

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