xiaoliuren_cast

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It adds a critical behavioral rule ("host MUST NOT invent the cast") and notes the optional dependency for lunar_time, which goes beyond what the schema offers. It doesn't describe error handling or output details, but output schema exists.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose. Every clause adds value: the invocation rule, parameter requirements, and dependency warning. No redundant or filler content.

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?

The description covers all essential invocation logic: three methods, their parameter requirements, and a critical behavioral constraint. Since an output schema exists, return values need not be described. For a 5-parameter tool with method-dependent behavior, this is complete and sufficient.

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 coverage is only 40%, so the description must clarify parameter interplay. It explains that method=numbers requires month/day/hour while method=time and lunar_time require a datetime, and notes the lunar-python dependency. This adds meaningful guidance beyond the raw schema fields.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: "Cast Xiao Liu Ren". This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like iching_cast or tarot_draw, and the tool name accurately reflects its function.

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 clearly explains which parameters are needed for each method (numbers week month/day/hour; time/lunar_time need ISO datetime), providing practical usage context. It doesn't explicitly contrast with other divination tools, but the method breakdown is sufficient for correct invocation.

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