Arroyo — Water Houses Trauma

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's lack of behavioral detail is partially compensated. However, the description adds no context about what the tool does beyond a vague pattern label, missing an opportunity to clarify behavioral traits like return format or side effects.

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 extremely concise but not effectively structured. It contains a single vague sentence and a group label, plus an example that offers no real information. The brevity wastes the opportunity to convey essential details.

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, no output schema, and a minimal description, the tool is severely underdocumented. An AI agent cannot accurately determine required inputs or expected outputs. The description offers no context for the complex astrological computation implied by the name.

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%, so the description must compensate for parameter meanings. It fails entirely: the only example shows an empty chart placeholder. None of the 11 parameters (e.g., date, time, houseSystem, zodiacType) are explained, leaving the agent guessing their role.

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 'Water-house trauma patterns' provides a vague indication of the tool's domain but lacks a specific verb or resource. It does not clearly state what the tool computes or returns, making it difficult for an AI agent to understand its exact purpose. The title 'Arroyo — Water Houses Trauma' hints at a psychological astrological interpretation but is insufficient.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool vs. alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or contraindications. With many sibling tools like 'modern_arroyo_cycle_of_becoming', an agent has no basis for selection.

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