cn402_bazi_xiaoyun

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but lacks behavioral disclosure. It does not mention output format, whether changes are reversible, authentication needs, or any side effects. The pricing note is irrelevant to behavior.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a pricing note. The core action is front-loaded, and every word adds value. No redundant information.

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 niche topic and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'pillars' are, how gender affects the result, or what the output looks like, leaving the agent with limited context to correctly use the tool.

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 coverage is 100% for the two parameters (datetime, gender), so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. No examples, constraints, or format details are given.

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 computes annual minor luck pillars for early life, distinguishing it from sibling tools like cn402_bazi_dayun (major luck) and cn402_bazi_full. It includes both English and Chinese terms, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 specifies when to use: for childhood years before Da Yun starts. It implies the tool is for early life periods, but does not explicitly exclude usage for other ages or compare with alternatives beyond the context of sibling tools.

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