Zenith

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds context about the tool's specific purpose (zenith) and cost (50 credits), but does not reveal any hidden 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 concise with one sentence plus group/cost/example. However, the example includes 'planetId' which is not in the schema, confusing the structure. Every sentence earns its place, but the mismatch reduces 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?

With 11 parameters, no output schema, and a misleading example, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain key parameters like latitude, longitude, zodiacType, or the cosmogram flag, leaving the agent underinformed about how to properly invoke the 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. However, it only provides an example with a subset of parameters (date, time, timezoneOffset, planetId) and planetId is not even in the input schema. The other 8 parameters (latitude, longitude, houseSystem, etc.) are left unexplained, offering little semantic help.

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 uses a specific verb 'Find' and clearly states the resource 'geographic locations' and the exact condition 'a given planet is exactly at the zenith (MC) at the birth moment'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'acg' which likely cover all astro-cartography lines.

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 when to use the tool (for zenith locations) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternative tool to use for other angles (e.g., AC, DSC, IC). No exclusions or comparisons are mentioned.

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