Planetary Cycles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds the context that this tool finds conjunctions and interprets them as synodic cycle starts, which is consistent and adds value.

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?

Concise with one main sentence, group/cost metadata, and an example. Well-structured and front-loaded, but the example could be more informative.

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?

The description explains what the tool does (find conjunctions) but does not describe the output format, such as whether it returns dates, degrees, or planet names. Given no output schema, this is a gap for an agent to understand the result.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only provides an example without explaining parameter semantics, such as what planet IDs correspond to or the date format details. Schema coverage is low, but description does not compensate.

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 verb 'Find' and resource 'conjunctions between two planets', and specifies 'defining the start of a new synodic cycle', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'aspects' that return all aspect types.

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 alternatives such as 'aspects', 'eclipses', or other cycle-related tools. The group and cost are provided but do not help the agent decide between similar tools.

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