perform_reading

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

Annotations indicate this is not read-only (readOnlyHint: false) and not idempotent, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not disclose side effects, state changes, or return format beyond the schema. With sparse annotations, the description should provide more transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is concise but could be more informative without losing brevity.

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 complexity of tarot readings (many spread types, session handling, language options) and that an output schema exists, the description is incomplete. It does not explain session behavior, output structure, or how to interpret results, leaving significant gaps.

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 only adds 'using a specific spread', which does not clarify the meaning of parameters like question, sessionId, or language beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action ('perform') and the resource ('tarot card reading') and mentions the key parameter ('using a specific spread'). However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like get_daily_card or list_available_spreads, which could be alternatives for obtaining readings or card information.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not specify prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it compares to sibling tools such as get_daily_card or recommend_spread.

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