get_taiyi

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns structured text and a PNG, and that 'ming' mode uses an approximation. It does not discuss authorization or side effects, but the read-only nature is implied.

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 well-structured with Args and Returns sections, uses bullet points for the mode enum, and is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, parameters, behavior (including approximation warning), and return format (structured text and PNG). It is fully sufficient for a specialized tool.

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 fully compensates by explaining datetime_str as a date-time string with format, and mode as the calculation unit with enum values and a specific warning about 'ming'. This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 tool calculates Taiyi Divine Number layout/calculation method, with a specific verb ('계산한다') and resource ('태을신수 포국/산법'). It distinguishes itself from potential siblings by detailing its specific function, even though no siblings are listed.

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 provides context on when to use the tool (calculating Taiyi for various time units) and includes a warning about the 'ming' mode approximation. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but given the specialized nature, 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.