generate_horoscope

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 mentions the generate_image parameter and the current_year default, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., saving, cost), required permissions, or error handling for invalid inputs like hour_val.

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 starts with a clear one-line summary followed by an Args list. While structured, the parameter descriptions are somewhat verbose and could be streamlined. The front-loaded purpose helps, but the overall length is moderate.

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 9 optional parameters and no output schema, the description explains all inputs but lacks any description of the output format (e.g., what data the chart contains). It also does not mention prerequisites (e.g., valid date ranges) or how errors are handled. Siblings like save_horoscope suggest a complex output, leaving a gap.

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%, but the description provides detailed parameter explanations including valid formats (e.g., hour_val can be '14:30', 'Ngọ', 'Tý', or index 1-12). This adds significant value beyond the raw schema, clarifying each parameter's purpose and default behavior.

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 explicitly states 'Generate a full Tu Vi (Vietnamese horoscope) chart, with optional high-quality chart image rendering.' This clearly identifies the action (generate) and the resource (horoscope chart). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like delete, get, list, and save horoscope.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the name and context of siblings imply it is for creating a new horoscope, there is no guidance on when not to use it or which sibling to choose for specific needs (e.g., retrieving a saved one).

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