qm_data_astronomy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so: it states the tool never pays, never touches private keys, and never holds funds, describes the x402 payment challenge flow, notes the price, and clarifies that data returns in the tool result. This is unusually rich disclosure for a mutation-adjacent tool.

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?

Front-loads the data outputs before the payment mechanics, and each sentence is functional. The pricing and resale clauses are somewhat lengthy but convey actionable commercial terms, so waste is minimal.

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 paid data tool with a 4-param, fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers the call protocol, cost, payment mechanism, and return path. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema by explaining the ordering semantics of the 'payment' parameter (first call vs. re-call) and that the live 402 challenge is authoritative. lat/lon/date carry no added detail, keeping this from a 5.

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?

States specific outputs (sunrise, sunset, twilight, moon phase) plus the resource (location and date), which distinguishes it from siblings like qm_data_weather and qm_data_time. An agent can identify the tool's function without opening the schema.

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?

Names concrete use cases (photography planning, event scheduling, radio operations) and gives an explicit two-phase call protocol: omit 'payment' first to get requirements, then re-call with the signed payload. The when-to-call sequencing is fully spelled out.

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