get_daily_pillars

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It only indicates a read operation via 'Get', but does not mention any other behavioral traits (e.g., authentication needs, performance, error conditions). This is minimal.

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 two sentences, immediately stating the purpose and parameter format. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded.

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 simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description is mostly complete. It explains the input format but does not describe output structure or potential date range limitations, though the output schema likely covers the return values.

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 single parameter 'date' has 0% schema coverage, but the description adds format specification (ISO 8601) and an example. This meaningfully assists the agent beyond the raw schema, though it does not cover edge cases.

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 explicitly states the tool gets Year, Month, and Day pillars for any date, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('pillars'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_hourly_pillars by specifying the temporal scope.

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 usage for any date and provides an example format, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings or any exclusions. The 'any date' phrasing is broad but functional.

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