Monthly Overview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only content retrieval by calling the output an 'article,' but never states that it has no side effects, does not require authentication, or returns static versus generated content.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that communicates the resource and its scope without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a no-parameter content 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?

With an output schema present and no parameters, the description does not need to explain return values or inputs. The main gap is contextual: it does not help an agent select this tool over similar siblings like monthly_horoscope, leaving the definition minimally viable for invocation but weak for discovery.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate since there are none to describe.

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 names a specific resource ('Artículo') and its scope ('visión general astrológica del mes'), so an agent knows it returns a monthly astrological overview article. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling monthly_horoscope or monthly_archive, leaving ambiguity about which monthly content to request.

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?

The description gives no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as monthly_horoscope, monthly_archive, or week_ahead. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or routing hints, so the agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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