cn402_folk_name-meaning

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions analysis of Five Elements, stroke total, and auspicious meaning but does not specify the output format, whether it is read-only, or any side effects. The mention of 'Price: unknown' is not behavioral.

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 redundant keyword phrases before the main sentence, and the irrelevant 'Price: unknown on Base' line adds noise. The key functional sentence is present but not front-loaded, wasting space.

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?

Without an output schema, the description only vaguely lists what is analyzed (Five Elements, stroke total, auspicious meaning) but lacks detail on the return format or structure. The mention of BaZi compatibility is unclear, and the price info distracts from completeness.

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 only parameter 'name' is already described in the schema as 'Chinese name (required, 2-4 hanzi)'. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given 100% 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 explicitly states the tool analyzes a Chinese name's Five Elements composition, stroke total, and traditional auspicious meaning, providing a clear verb and resource. While it lists many related keywords, the core purpose is distinguishable from sibling hanzi and bazi tools.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cn402_hanzi_wuxing or cn402_bazi_wuxing. The usage context is only implied by the name and keyword list, leaving the agent without clear decision criteria.

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