get_special_days

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: the tool returns a JSON list, allows city name or coordinates, derives timezone if omitted, and defaults to the 'drik' system. It does not discuss authentication, rate limits, or error handling, but covers essential behavior for usage.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose and major argument details. It is front-loaded with the main function. Although somewhat lengthy, it avoids unnecessary words and is well-structured.

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 presence of an output schema (signaled), the description focuses on inputs and behavior. It covers the required parameters and key optional ones, explaining fallbacks. The overall usage context is complete for an agent to invoke the tool 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful context for parameters: city can be name or lat/lon, timezone is derived automatically, system has default and possible values. It provides example values for year and month. While not all 7 parameters are fully detailed, the key ones are addressed.

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 that the tool returns a JSON list of special days for a given month, explicitly listing types like Ekadashi, Amavasya, etc. This differentiates it from sibling tools that focus on other calendar events like eclipses or graha positions.

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 clear usage context, specifying required arguments (year, month, city) and optional parameters with defaults. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, though the list of special days implicitly guides selection.

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