sunrise_daily

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

Annotations declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the source domain (timeanddate.com), return type (pandas.DataFrame), and input format examples, but omits rate limits or authentication needs.

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 purpose is stated first, followed by a source URL and structured docstring-style parameter notes. It is efficient with little redundancy, though the URL is somewhat extraneous and the parameter type lines (:type date: str) repeat obvious information.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description provides purpose, parameter examples, and return type. It omits default values and exact date format details, but those are recoverable from the schema defaults, making it mostly complete.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It documents both parameters with examples for date ('20200428') and city ('北京', '上海'), but does not mention the schema defaults ('beijing', '20240428') or clarify date format nuances (example differs from default by two digits).

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?

States 'daily sunrise/sunset data' (每日日出日落数据), a specific resource with temporal scope ('daily') and a concrete external source. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling sunrise_monthly, but the word '每日' implies daily granularity.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are offered. Usage is implied by the name and parameter examples (querying sunrise/sunset for a specific date and city), which is minimally viable but lacks exclusions or sibling routing.

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