venus_star_points

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating no side effects. The description adds value by explaining the output includes quality and zodiac details, clarifying the behavior of returning conjunction events nearest to the birth date. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise: two sentences plus credit cost and example. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the purpose, output content, and provides an example. It does not specify the exact return structure (e.g., array of objects) but covers essential information for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description does not add new parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, but the example demonstrates how to use parameters together, providing marginal additional context.

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 it retrieves Venus Star Points (Sun-Venus conjunctions) near a birth date and specifies the output includes conjunction quality (cazimi, combust, under beams) with zodiac details. It uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'Venus Star Points', distinguishing it from other astrology tools like venus_elongations.

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 a credit cost and an example but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions for using it. The example offers practical guidance but lacks explicit usage boundaries.

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