Wellness Cycle Milestones

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 clear. The description adds that the output includes nearby and full lists of milestones, which provides some behavioral context beyond annotations, but it does not disclose details like rate limits or authentication needs.

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 concise: one sentence for purpose, a group label, and an example. It is front-loaded with the purpose. However, the example could be integrated more formally, and the description does not use structured formatting like bullet points.

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 that the tool has one parameter with a minimal schema and no output schema, the description provides the purpose and an example but lacks details on return format, date format expectations, and error handling. The output hint ('nearby + full list') is vague. This is adequate for a simple tool but not fully complete.

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 with only a 'body' property described as 'Raw JSON body — see the example in the tool description for required fields'. The description compensates by providing an explicit example with birthDate and targetDate, which guides the agent on the required structure. Since schema coverage is 100% but schema itself is vague, the description adds crucial semantics.

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 specifies that the tool returns age-based wellness milestones, listing examples like Saturn return, Uranus opposition, and hormonal shifts. It distinguishes from other wellness tools (e.g., wellness_crystals, wellness_diet) by focusing on milestones. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool calculates milestones based on birthDate and targetDate, though the example helps.

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 versus other wellness tools or siblings. The '[Group: Wellness]' label is present but no comparison or exclusion criteria are given. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and example.

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