sky_times

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful default behavior (date defaults to now, location defaults to home) and clarifies the astronomical-darkness range, but does not describe output format, timezone handling, or any operational limits.

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 short, front-loads the main output, then adds two useful defaults. The line breaks are slightly fragmented but every sentence contributes information and nothing is redundant.

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?

It describes the high-level return content (rise/transit/set and twilight times), which helps since there is no output schema. However, with four optional parameters and no schema descriptions, the description is incomplete about coordinate and timezone semantics, leaving gaps for correct invocation.

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 must carry parameter meaning. It explains the date format and that location defaults to home, but lat/lon coordinate formats and the timezone parameter are not addressed. Two of four parameters receive essentially no semantic explanation here.

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 identifies the astronomical resource: rise/transit/set times for the Sun, Moon and planets, plus all twilight times. It is specific enough to distinguish from general highlight or event tools, but does not explicitly name or compare against siblings like tonight_highlights or astro_events.

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?

It gives input defaults for date and location but provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as tonight_highlights, astro_events, or weather_forecast. There is no stated when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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