monthly_horoscopeRetrieve monthly horoscopes for all twelve zodiac signs or one specific sign by providing an optional sign name. Use for astrology forecasts.
Horóscopo mensual. Sin 'sign' devuelve los doce signos; con 'sign' devuelve solo ese signo.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sign | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the default behavior (returns all twelve signs when no sign is given), but does not state read-only nature, side effects, or any other operational traits.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and immediately followed by the parameter behavior. No waste; every word earns its place.
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 read tool with an output schema, the description covers the key parameter behavior and is adequate. However, it omits valid sign values and any routing guidance relative to sibling horoscope tools, leaving minor 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the effect of omitting vs providing 'sign', which adds meaningful semantics, but it does not specify valid sign values, format, or case sensitivity.
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 restates the title 'Monthly Horoscope' without a specific verb, so the core purpose is vague. It adds behavioral detail about the 'sign' parameter, but does not clearly distinguish itself from siblings like daily_horoscope or monthly_overview.
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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as daily_horoscope, weekly_horoscope, or monthly_overview. The parameter behavior is described, but that is not usage context relative to other tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.