buildBaziFromLunarDatetime

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool '获取八字信息' (gets eight-character information), which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify if it requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format looks like (especially since there's no output schema). The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic purpose.

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 a single, efficient sentence: '根据农历时间、性别来获取八字信息。' (Get eight-character information based on lunar datetime and gender). It's front-loaded with the core purpose, has zero wasted words, and is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral details (e.g., output format, error handling), usage guidelines compared to siblings, and doesn't compensate for the absence of annotations or output schema. The high schema coverage helps, but the description alone is insufficient for full contextual understanding.

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 100%, with all parameters well-documented in the schema (e.g., 'eightCharProviderSect' explains the configuration for midnight hour, 'gender' specifies 0 for female and 1 for male, 'lunarDatetime' gives an example format). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 the tool's purpose: '根据农历时间、性别来获取八字信息' (Get eight-character information based on lunar datetime and gender). It specifies the verb '获取' (get) and the resource '八字信息' (eight-character information), which is distinct from sibling tools like 'buildBaziFromSolarDatetime' (which uses solar datetime) or 'getBaziDetail' (which likely provides detailed analysis). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings (e.g., 'getChineseCalendar' might overlap in lunar context).

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 alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'buildBaziFromSolarDatetime' (for solar datetime input) or 'getBaziDetail' (for detailed analysis), nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is implied by the parameters (lunar datetime and gender), but no explicit context is given.

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