RWS — Year Ahead

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, destructive, idempotent, and openWorld hints. The description adds the spread structure but does not disclose any additional 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 extremely concise, with only three short lines. It front-loads the key information (13-card spread) and includes a group tag and example. However, a more structured purpose statement could improve clarity.

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?

For a 13-card spread tool, the description omits important details such as the format of the output (e.g., does it return card names, positions, interpretations?) and the deterministic behavior implied by the seed. Without an output schema, this information is critical for an agent to use the tool 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 input schema only defines a generic 'body' object with no property definitions. The description compensates by providing an explicit example request body with seed, question, and allowReversed fields, which conveys the required and optional parameters effectively.

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 specifies a 13-card spread covering 12 months and a theme, which clearly indicates the tool's purpose for year-ahead readings. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tarot tools like daily or single-card draws.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other tarot drawing tools. The example shows required fields but no context about when this spread is appropriate (e.g., annual forecasting) or when to avoid it.

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