Norn 3-Rune Cast

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

The description does not add behavioral insights beyond what annotations already provide (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc.). It does not explain the output format (e.g., returns three runes and interpretations) or any side effects. The example request body hints at a seed parameter but no behavioral context.

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 very short (two sentences plus an example). It is concise but wastes space on a group tag and example without adding critical information. It could be restructured to front-load purpose and parameter details.

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 lack of output schema, three undocumented parameters, and many sibling rune tools, the description is extremely incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how to interpret parameters, or when to select it over other rune tools. This severely hampers an agent's ability to use it correctly.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for all three parameters (seed, question, allowReversed). The description only shows an example with 'seed' but does not explain what seed controls (randomization?), the purpose of question (max 400 chars), or allowReversed (default true). No semantic meaning is added.

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 title 'Norn 3-Rune Cast' and description 'Past/Present/Future (Urdr/Verdandi/Skuld)' clearly state it casts three runes representing past, present, future. It is distinct from sibling rune tools (like runes_single or runes_nine) as it specifically does a three-rune spread focused on time. However, it does not explicitly differentiate why to choose this over other rune tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when a three-rune spread is desired, or when to use runes_single instead). No when-not-to-use or context is given.

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