Marseille — Spiritual

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe, reproducible operation. The description adds context (4-card spread, example request) but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 two sentences: one for the spread type and one for the group and example. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary 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?

The description covers the spread count, group, and example request, but lacks details on output format, field semantics (e.g., seed for reproducibility), and guidelines for the question parameter. Given no output schema, this is a notable gap.

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 input schema has one parameter 'body' with no defined properties, but the description provides an example with three fields (seed, question, allowReversed). This example adds practical meaning beyond the bare schema, helping the agent structure the request.

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 states '4-card spiritual development spread' which is a specific verb-resource pair (draw/spread for spiritual development). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like tarot_marseille_draw_love, tarot_marseille_draw_career, etc.

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 use for spiritual development questions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this spread versus alternatives like love or career spreads. With many tarot siblings, this omission reduces clarity.

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