Personal Year (kabbalistic)

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, which the description aligns with. However, the description adds little behavioral detail (e.g., what the output looks like, how the calculation works) and introduces confusion with an example that includes 'name' and 'year' fields not present in the input schema.

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 brief and front-loaded with the action, but the example request body adds noise without matching the schema, reducing conciseness.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should hint at the return value but does not. The parameter set (including location) is not justified for numerology, leaving the tool's completeness in question.

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% but the description does not enhance understanding of the parameters. The purpose of latitude, longitude, and timezoneOffset for a numerology calculation is unexplained, and the example contradicts the schema by listing extra fields.

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 it calculates the Personal Year number for a given calendar year within a 9-year cycle, and specifies it uses the Kabbalistic phonetic system. This distinguishes it from other numerology systems (e.g., Chaldean), but it does not differentiate from the 'strict' variant of the same system.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus similar ones (e.g., Chaldean personal year) or what prerequisites are needed. No context is provided for the ideal scenario or alternatives.

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