Maturity (kabbalistic-strict)

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds activation age (~35) as behavioral context. No contradictions. Short but adequate for a calculation tool.

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?

Very concise: two sentences plus group label and example. Purpose stated upfront. Could be improved by removing the extraneous 'name' from example or adding structure.

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?

Adequate for a simple calculation with one required parameter. However, no output schema or hint about response format. Misleading example with 'name' that is not a parameter. Could benefit from usage guidance among many sibling numerology tools.

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 covers 4 parameters with descriptions. Example request includes 'name' which is not in schema, potentially misleading. Description adds no additional meaning beyond schema for parameters.

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?

Describes calculating Maturity number as sum of Life Path and Expression, activates around age 35, and specifies Kabbalistic (Mathers strict) system. Clearly distinguishes from other systems via name and group label.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like other maturity calculators (e.g., Chaldean, Pythagorean). Only implicit through system name. No when-not or alternative suggestions.

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