cn402_iching_yao

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'Price: unknown on Base (auto-paid in USDC)', which indicates a cost and payment method, adding some behavioral context. However, it does not disclose authentication, rate limits, or any side effects.

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 functional sentence is clear and front-loaded. However, the description includes redundant synonyms ('I Ching line meaning / 爻辞 / individual line text / yao ci...') that add noise. The price note is useful but not essential. Overall, slightly verbose but effective.

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 is provided, yet the description only says 'Get the text and meaning' without specifying the format (e.g., plain text, JSON, fields included). It does not mention error handling or edge cases. For a tool with two params and no output schema, more detail on the return structure would improve 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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds example line names (初九, 九二等) and clarifies that line 1 is the bottom, but this reinforces rather than adds significant new 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 it retrieves the text and meaning of a specific line (1-6) of a specific hexagram. It uses specific verbs and resources, and the mention of 'individual line text' distinguishes it from siblings like 'iching_hexagram' which likely gives whole hexagram info.

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 implies that this tool should be used when you need a specific line's meaning, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., iching_hexagram, iching_full) or provide any when-not-to-use guidance.

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