cn402_bazi_shishen

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, prerequisites, or cost implications (price is mentioned but not behavioral). It only says 'compute relationships', leaving the agent unaware of any constraints or outcomes.

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 cluttered with multiple names and a price statement that is irrelevant to function. The core purpose is buried, and the information is not front-loaded. It could be significantly more concise.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description does not explain what the output contains. Given the complexity of Ten Gods and the many sibling BaZi tools, the description is incomplete and leaves the agent guessing about return format.

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 has one parameter with a description, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 computes Ten Gods relationships in a BaZi chart relative to the Day Master. It uses multiple names but the core purpose is evident. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling BaZi tools that may also include Ten Gods information.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cn402_bazi_full or cn402_bazi_wuxing. The description merely states it is 'core of Chinese astrology analysis' but does not provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use criteria.

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