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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine domain behavior beyond that: the preferred nakshatra list, the Sun/Saturn avoidance rule, the scoring-shape reference to the marriage endpoint, and the 50-credit cost.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and the supporting details are terse. The trailing [Group] and [Cost] tags are metadata rather than description prose, but they carry useful information and cost little space.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a 10-parameter tool at 40% schema coverage, the description omits how to scope the search window, location, and ayanamsa, which an agent needs to call it correctly.

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% across 10 parameters, so the description must compensate and does not. It never mentions search_window_start/end, topN, latitude/longitude, timezoneOffset, ayanamsa, or fields, leaving several params undocumented in both places.

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 verb (auspicious-window scanning) and resource (buying a new vehicle), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like property_purchase, marriage, or business_start. An agent can select it without opening any 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?

Usage is implied by 'for buying a new vehicle', which is enough to route from the many muhurat siblings, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no when-not guidance, and no named alternative (e.g. general_auspicious or property_purchase).

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