analyze_ziwei_palace

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the agent knows it's a safe, repeatable query operation. The description adds value by specifying it provides '详细信息' (detailed information) about specific palaces, which gives context about the depth of analysis. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or what constitutes 'detailed information' in practice.

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, efficient Chinese sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. There's zero wasted language or unnecessary elaboration. It's appropriately sized for what it communicates, though what it communicates is limited in scope.

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 an 8-parameter tool with low schema coverage (38%) and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'detailed information' means in the output, doesn't clarify the relationship between parameters, and provides no context about the Ziwei astrology system for users unfamiliar with it. The annotations help with safety profile, but the description leaves too many gaps for effective tool selection and use.

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?

With only 38% schema description coverage (3 of 8 parameters have descriptions), the description carries significant burden but adds no parameter information. It mentions analyzing '特定宫位' (specific palaces), which aligns with the 'palace_name' parameter, but doesn't explain the meaning or significance of parameters like 'time_index', 'calendar', 'is_leap_month', or the various format/language options. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 '分析紫微斗数特定宫位的详细信息' clearly states the action ('分析' - analyze) and resource ('紫微斗数特定宫位' - specific Ziwei palace), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'get_ziwei_chart' or 'get_ziwei_fortune', which likely provide different types of Ziwei analysis.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'get_ziwei_chart' and 'get_ziwei_fortune' available, there's no indication whether this tool provides more detailed palace-specific analysis versus broader chart or fortune analysis. No context about prerequisites or typical use cases is mentioned.

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