Profections

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds group and cost info but does not disclose behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise: two sentences plus metadata and an example. It is front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary information.

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 tool has no output schema, but the description lists the computed values (profected Ascendant, lord of year, activated house, monthly sub-rulers), giving a good idea of the response content. It lacks details on the exact return format, but it is sufficient for a calculation tool.

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?

Parameter schema coverage is 100%, and the schema includes descriptions for the body parameter and its nested properties. The tool description itself does not add additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Calculate' and specifies the resource 'annual profections' with a list of outputs (profected Ascendant, lord of year, activated house, monthly sub-rulers). It is specific, but there is a sibling tool 'hellenistic_brennan_profections_detail' that may overlap, and the description does not explicitly differentiate from it.

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 includes metadata like group and cost but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite conditions are stated.

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