Planet Positions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that the output is raw longitudes without houses/aspects, which is consistent. However, it does not reveal any additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations convey, such as rate limits or auth needs.

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, containing only two sentences plus a group/cost line and an example. Every element serves a purpose: the first sentence states the core function, the second adds context, and the example shows usage. No wasted 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?

Given the tool has 11 parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat incomplete. It explains the core output but does not describe the return format or the role of optional parameters like latitude, longitude, or houseSystem. However, it is adequate for the primary use case of getting raw longitudes.

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%, and the description only mentions date, time, and timezoneOffset in an example. It does not explain the other 8 parameters (e.g., latitude, longitude, zodiacType), leaving their purpose unclear. An example is helpful but insufficient for a tool with 11 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?

The description clearly states it calculates 'raw planet longitudes' and explicitly notes it is 'without full chart context (no houses, no aspects)', distinguishing it from full chart or aspect tools. The verb 'calculate' and resource 'planet longitudes' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description implies usage when only raw longitude data is needed, and the exclusion of houses/aspects helps choose between this and full-chart tools. It provides an example request, but does not explicitly list alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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