农历/公历转换

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it does not describe runtime behavior such as output format, side effects, or assumptions. It focuses on usage conditions rather than what the tool actually does when invoked, leaving the agent without insight into return values or potential pitfalls.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the calling condition, and provides a crucial alternative in the second sentence. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers when and why to use the tool, but does not explain what the tool returns or how the output is structured, which would be important for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 input schema covers all five parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters themselves; it only mentions that bazi_paipan supports lunar=true, which is unrelated to this tool's parameters.

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 the tool's function: converting between lunar and solar dates ('农历与公历日期换算'). It uses a specific verb (换算) and resource (dates), and distinguishes itself from sibling bazi_paipan by noting that chart casting does not require this conversion.

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?

Explicit when-to-use guidance: '仅当用户明确要求进行农历与公历日期换算时才调用' (only call when user explicitly requests conversion). It also provides a when-not-to-use alternative by stating that bazi_paipan accepts lunar parameters directly (lunar=true), and notes the tool is rarely used ('本工具极少使用').

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