Parans

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true) are consistent with 'Calculate' in description. The description adds significant context about the tool's purpose and example request, beyond what annotations alone provide. No contradictions.

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 concise with a clear definition, group/cost metadata, and a practical example. Front-loaded and no unnecessary words.

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, 2 required, no output schema, the description only gives an example request and defines the concept. It lacks explanations for all parameters and output format, leaving the agent underinformed for correct invocation.

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%. The description provides an example with 5 of 11 parameters, but no individual parameter descriptions. With 0% coverage, the description should compensate more; it adds only partial semantics via example.

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 explicitly defines 'fixed star parans' and explains the concept of latitude circles where celestial bodies rise/set simultaneously. The tool name and title match, and the definition distinguishes it from siblings like 'fixed_stars'.

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 vs alternatives like 'fixed_stars' or 'chart'. The 'Astro-Geography' group hints at context but lacks direct when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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