calculate_solar_revolution

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

Given no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like permissions, side effects, or output nature. It only explains the concept of a solar return, not whether it's read-only, what data it accesses, or what the output contains (no output schema).

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?

Two sentences front-load the purpose and provide a concise astronomical definition. No redundant information; every word contributes to understanding the tool's core function.

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?

With 6 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks completeness. It doesn't explain the output format, how the chart differs from transits, or what the optional location parameters imply (e.g., relocation chart). It's insufficient for a complex astrological tool.

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%, so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. It provides context about the solar return but no additional meaning for individual parameters, maintaining the baseline of 3.

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 it calculates a solar return chart and defines the astronomical event (Sun returning to birth position). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like planetary positions, synastry, or transits.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., transits or synastry). It only states the tool's function without contextualizing its use relative to siblings or providing prerequisites.

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