calculate_planetary_positions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the purpose and inputs, omitting any behavioral traits such as computational complexity, permission requirements, error handling for invalid coordinates, or the nature of the output (e.g., read-only calculation).

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 sentence of 15 words, front-loaded with the action 'Calculate'. It is efficient but could be restructured to include more critical information without increasing length.

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?

The tool has no output schema and moderate complexity. The description lists what is calculated but does not clarify the return format, data structure, or assumptions (e.g., geocentric vs heliocentric). Error handling and edge cases are not mentioned.

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% for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about what is calculated (planetary positions, houses, chart points, asteroids) but does not enhance meaning beyond the schema's property descriptions.

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 verb 'Calculate' and the resource 'planetary positions, houses, chart points and asteroids', specifying the inputs (datetime and coordinates). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings (calculate_solar_revolution, calculate_synastry, calculate_transits) which handle different astrological aspects.

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 calculating astrological positions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not or exclusionary language is provided, leaving the agent to infer context from sibling tool names.

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