asktian_daily_reading

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral info. It discloses input parameters and what is returned, but does not mention if it is read-only or any side effects. Since it's a prediction tool, the behavior is implied but not explicitly stated beyond the return content.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and details, no redundancy. Every sentence is informative and earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description adequately lists return elements (archetype, energy, colors, direction, hours, advice, caution). All three parameters are described. However, the temporal scope ('today's') is clear from name and description, but could be explicitly reinforced.

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. The description adds value by explaining the gender parameter ('some traditions weigh gender') and birth_hour default ('defaults to noon'), which aids correct parameter specification beyond the schema.

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 it provides a personalized Chinese metaphysics reading for today, including specific elements like archetype, energy, colors, direction, hours, advice, and caution. This distinguishes it from siblings like asktian_best_time_for_action or asktian_compatibility.

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?

Explicit instructions: 'Use this when the user asks how today will be for them, what colors to wear, where to face their desk, or for general daily guidance.' This provides clear context and implicitly tells when not to use it (e.g., for best action times or compatibility).

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