Lord of the Night

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds context about the 9-deity cycle and provides an example, but does not disclose response format or any behavioral nuances beyond the 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 at two sentences plus an example and group label. It front-loads the core purpose, making it efficient for agent comprehension.

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 the simple required parameters and annotations, the description is moderately complete. However, the lack of an output schema and no description of the return value (e.g., deity name or number) leaves the agent without full context of what to expect.

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?

All parameters are described in the input schema with high coverage (100%). The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns the 9-day cycle of underworld deities (G1-G9) for a given night. It differentiates itself from sibling Mayan tools like 'mayan_tzolkin' or 'mayan_haab' by specifying the night lord cycle.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. The group label '[Group: Mayan Calendars]' offers little discriminative advice, and no when-not-to-use or alternative references are given.

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