Generate Child Astrology Report (PDF or HTML)

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world. The description adds credit cost (5000 credits, premium) and warns about budget impact, which are behavioral traits not covered by annotations. It also notes the interpretive nature and disclaimer.

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 moderately concise, with each section providing value: purpose, cost warning, example. It could be more streamlined, but the structure is logical and front-loaded with key 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?

Given no output schema, the description partially compensates by mentioning output format (PDF or HTML) and including full natal data. However, it does not specify how to choose output format, response structure, or error handling, leaving gaps for an agent to infer.

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 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. However, the description's example request body uses a nested 'chart' object that contradicts the flat schema structure, potentially misleading the agent. The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool as a parenting-oriented natal report, specifying key planetary focuses (Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars) and output format (PDF or HTML). This distinguishes it from sibling report tools like reports_natal or reports_love.

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 for child-related astrology through its parenting orientation. It includes a cost warning and instruction to confirm with user, providing context on when to invoke. However, it lacks explicit exclusions or comparison to alternative sibling reports.

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