cn402_folk_match-zodiac

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the tool is paid ('auto-paid in USDC') but does not specify side effects, required permissions, or any constraints beyond computing a score. For a read-only compute tool, this is minimal.

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 opens with a long list of redundant synonyms (e.g., 'Zodiac compatibility / Chinese zodiac matching / 生肖配对 / ...'), which wastes space. The core functional description is concise, but the keyword padding could be trimmed for better readability.

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, and the description only mentions 'compatibility score and analysis' without detailing the output format. With many sibling tools and no annotations, the description lacks completeness for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior and return value.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds examples of animals (rat/ox/tiger) and the context of compatibility, but does not significantly enhance the schema's meaning. Baseline 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 the tool computes compatibility score and analysis between two Chinese zodiac animals, providing examples like 'rat/ox/tiger/...'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cn402_zodiac which likely gives individual zodiac info, and the title includes many synonyms for discoverability.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives among the many sibling tools (e.g., bazi, iching). The description does not mention when not to use or any prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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