Duodecima

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds no behavioral traits beyond the example request body, which is unhelpful and does not match the schema. No mention of output, side effects, or validation.

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?

Extremely short but lacks essential information. The example is misleading and does not align with the schema. Under-specification rather than conciseness.

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, 2 required, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what the tool returns, how parameters affect results, or how it fits among alternatives.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description fails to explain any of the 11 parameters. The example request body uses 'chart' which is not a parameter, offering no meaningful guidance.

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?

Description restates the title 'Duodecima' and adds '2.5° micro-sign per planet', but lacks a verb or action indicating what the tool does (e.g., computes, returns). It does not clearly distinguish from similar sibling tools like hellenistic_greenbaum_dodekatemoria.

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 vs alternatives. With many Hellenistic Greenbaum siblings, the description provides no context for selection.

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