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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-obvious context: the 50-credit Tier 3 cost and the built-in nakshatra/weekday selection logic. It does not explain output shape or how the window is scanned, but with an output schema present that gap is minor.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then the domain rules, then group/cost metadata – no wasted prose. The nakshatra enumeration is long but functions as the tool's decision criteria and is reasonably placed.

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 10 parameters (one required), an output schema, and thin schema descriptions, the definition leaves an agent guessing about the search-window format and how topN/lat/long interact. The cost and group tags are helpful, but the invocation surface is under-explained.

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 description coverage is only 40% and the description says nothing about the parameters it must carry: the required search_window_start date format, search_window_end, topN, or the coordinate pair. The nakshatra list is domain knowledge, not parameter semantics, so it does not compensate for the undocumented fields.

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?

States a specific function (auspicious-window scanner) for a precise occasion (starting formal education / Vidyarambha), which cleanly separates it from muhurat_marriage, muhurat_business_start, muhurat_vehicle_purchase and the rest of the muhurat family. An agent can select it without opening the schema.

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 occasion itself implies usage, but there is no explicit when-to-use routing versus the sibling muhurat scanner (e.g. muhurat_general_auspicious) and no stated exclusions or prerequisites. The nakshatra/tithi rules are domain output criteria, not invocation guidance.

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