cn402_zhanbu_measure-word

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the decomposition process but omits important details: what happens if input is not a single character, what output format or structure to expect, any cost implications (price is mentioned but as 'unknown'), and whether it is deterministic. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 includes many redundant synonyms and a price line that may not be essential for tool selection. While not overly long, it could be more concise by keeping only the core explanation. The structure is adequate but not optimized for quick scanning.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should outline what the returned data contains. It only mentions 'auspicious/inauspicious meanings' without specifying format, components, or confidence. For a complex divination method, more detail is needed to set expectations. However, the tool is relatively simple in input, so it is moderately complete.

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 single parameter 'word' has a schema description that matches the tool's purpose. The tool description adds context that the character is decomposed for interpretation. With 100% schema coverage and the description clarifying the divination goal, the parameter semantics are well-supported.

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's function: divination by decomposing a Chinese character. It provides multiple synonyms (Ce Zi, character oracle) and explicitly says 'Divine the future by decomposing a Chinese character into components and interpreting their auspicious/inauspicious meanings.' This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools like iching_coin or zhanbu_liuren.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where character divination is preferred over other methods like eight characters (bazi) or Liuren. Without such context, an agent may struggle to select appropriately among many divination tools.

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