Long Count

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent. Description adds the epoch and notation format, which is useful but doesn't reveal additional behavioral traits like optional parameter effects or error handling.

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?

Description is short and includes a group tag and example. It is front-loaded with the notation explanation. Could be slightly clearer in stating the purpose, but overall concise.

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?

No output schema exists, so description should explain the return value. It mentions 'Five-place positional notation' but doesn't explicitly state that the output is the Long Count string. Optional parameters (latitude, etc.) are not clarified for their impact on the conversion.

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%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. Description adds an example and group tag but no extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 states 'Five-place positional notation' and provides example, making it clear this converts a Gregorian date to Mayan Long Count. However, it doesn't explicitly state the conversion action, leaving slight ambiguity.

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 siblings like mayan_tzolkin or mayan_calendar_round. The group tag 'Mayan Calendars' implies category but not differentiation.

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