get_daily_almanac

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The read-only nature is implied by the verb 'Get' but not explicitly stated, and the description does not mention output format, error handling, or side-effect guarantees. It does transparently list the returned data categories, which is helpful context.

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 a single dense sentence with the core action front-loaded, followed by a long but relevant enumerated list of almanac fields. It is information-dense without padding, though the list could be structured with line breaks for improved 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?

With no output schema present, the description compensates by enumerating the main return categories, which is sufficient for a simple one-optional-parameter read-only query. It could clarify the final response shape, but the extensive content list makes the tool's scope effectively 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 input schema already fully documents the single optional date parameter, including its YYYY-MM-DD format, default of today, and New York timezone. The description adds no meaningful parameter-level details beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Get the full Chinese almanac for a date') and enumerates the major data categories returned, such as lunar date, day pillar, zodiac clash, auspicious/avoid items, and solar terms. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_daily_horoscope or get_solar_terms.

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 intended use is reasonably clear: use this when you need comprehensive date-specific almanac data. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when to prefer this tool over related ones such as get_solar_terms, get_hour_pillars, or pick_auspicious_dates.

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