Decanic Rulers

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it computes decan rulers per planet and belongs to the Hand tradition, which is consistent. No additional behavioral traits like rate limits or prerequisites are disclosed, but annotations cover the core safety profile.

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 and front-loaded with the purpose. However, the truncated example and lack of structure reduce clarity. It is concise but at the expense of completeness.

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 11 parameters and no output schema, the description fails to provide essential context. It does not explain input effects, return values, or constraints, making it inadequate for accurate tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of any parameter (e.g., date, time, zodiacType). The example is truncated and unhelpful. Without parameter semantics, the agent cannot correctly construct requests.

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 'Chaldean decan rulers per planet' which clearly indicates the tool computes decan rulers associated with planets. The group label 'Hellenistic — Hand tradition' further distinguishes it from other decan tools. However, it does not specify what exactly is returned (e.g., list of rulers, positions).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hellenistic_greenbaum_zodiacal_decans or hellenistic_hand_bounds. The description lacks context for selection, requiring the agent to infer from the tradition name alone.

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