Get Planet Position

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral details: returns geocentric ecliptic longitude, sign/degree, daily motion, retrograde state; defaults datetime to 'now'; single moment computation. No contradictions.

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?

Well-structured: summary, return details, usage guideline, body list, examples. Every sentence is informative and no fluff. Appropriate length for a single-position tool.

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 moderate complexity (4 params, 1 required), schema coverage 100%, and presence of output schema (not shown but mentioned), the description covers all essentials: purpose, parameters, return values, and usage examples. Complete for agent selection and invocation.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning via examples demonstrating parameter usage (e.g., datetime default, timezone requirement, zodiac options). Also clarifies the 'body' enum with full list and explanation of points like NorthNode, SouthNode, Lilith.

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 'Compute the zodiac position of a single body or point at a single moment.' It specifies the verb (compute), the resource (zodiac position), and distinguishes from sibling tools like compute_natal_chart (full chart).

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?

Explicitly guides to 'Use for "where is X" questions rather than a full chart.' Examples further clarify appropriate use cases (e.g., locating a planet, checking retrograde). Does not name specific sibling alternatives, but the guidance is clear.

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