Lunar Calendar

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds group and cost info (100 credits, Tier 4) which is helpful but not critical. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise (3 lines plus example), front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or filler content.

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?

The description lists the calendar components but lacks details on output format or structure. Since there is no output schema, the description should at least hint at what the response contains (e.g., array of days, object with phases). This gap lowers completeness for a moderately complex tool.

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 provides an example request body clarifying numeric format. However, it does not explain valid ranges (e.g., year limits, month 1-12) or handling of null values 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 clearly states the tool calculates a lunar calendar for a given month and lists specific components (Moon sign per day, lunar phases, void-of-course windows, perigee/apogee). This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from siblings like moon_phase or moon_voc that focus on single aspects.

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 implies usage for monthly lunar calculations but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like eclipse_analysis or transit_calendar. No exclusions or when-not guidance are provided.

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