solar_terms

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose useful behavioral detail — the return values are exact moments in both UTC and Beijing time, and the result set shrinks to one term when name is supplied. However, it says nothing about precision, date-range limits, or error behavior for invalid names, leaving gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the resource, the output time bases, and the parameter-driven branching with no filler.

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?

For a two-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description tells the agent what is returned (UTC and Beijing times) and how name changes the result. Sufficient to call correctly, with only minor gaps around name format and precision.

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 50%: name has an example ('立春 / Start of Spring') and year has only type/bounds in the schema. The description adds genuine meaning by tying name to the single-term output mode, but it does not explain accepted name formats beyond the schema example or any year limitations.

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 names a specific verb (List) and a precise resource (the exact moments of the 24 solar terms), plus the scope (Gregorian year) and the narrowing behavior (one term if name is given). This is clearly distinguishable from the astronomy/time siblings true_solar_time and china_dst.

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?

Usage is only implied: pass a year to get all 24 terms, or pass name to get one. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or mention of the sibling tools, so the agent must infer selection from the single sentence.

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