RWS — Celtic Cross

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 10-card spread detail and an example request, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as determinism from seed or card interpretation style.

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: two lines of text plus an example. It front-loads the essential purpose and groups the tool effectively, with no extraneous 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?

Despite the annotations covering safety, the description lacks information about the output format (e.g., card positions, interpretations). Without an output schema, this omission leaves the agent guessing about what the tool returns, which is critical for a tarot reading 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?

The input schema is minimal (a generic JSON object), but the description compensates by providing a concrete example with fields 'seed', 'question', and 'allowReversed'. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though it does not fully document all possible 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 'Classical 10-card Celtic Cross spread' and the title 'RWS — Celtic Cross' along with the group label 'Tarot — Rider-Waite-Smith' unambiguously identify the tool as a specific tarot spread for the Rider-Waite-Smith deck, distinguishing it from other tarot 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 Celtic Cross spread versus other tarot tools (e.g., three-card draws, career spreads). It lacks any contextual cues about appropriate use cases or alternatives.

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