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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds cost tier (20 credits, Tier 2) and the Vedic group tag, which annotations do not convey, but says nothing about output shape, determinism of the projection, or what ayanamsa/house-system choices imply for the result.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences: definition, house significations, then the concrete yoga rules. No fluff, though the bracketed group/cost metadata is appended rather than integrated.

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 described. The domain concept is explained adequately, but for a 15-parameter, 4-required astrological computation the definition omits any guidance on how the input parameters (notably ayanamsa and house system) alter the Karakamsa result.

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?

With 15 parameters and only ~33% schema description coverage, the description carries a compensation burden it does not meet. It adds no meaning for date, time, latitude, longitude, ayanamsa, houseSystem, or the compact-mode fields — all of which materially affect a Karakamsa calculation (e.g. the D9 depends on ayanamsa).

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 resource (the Karakamsa 12-house projection) and states exactly what it computes, including which yogas are surfaced (5th-house = Ishta Devata, 12th-house = Moksha Indicator). It does not, however, differentiate itself from near-siblings like astroway_vedic_jaimini_atmakaraka_navamsa or astroway_vedic_jaimini_yogas, which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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?

There is no statement of when to choose this tool over the many jaimini_yogas_* and atmakaraka_* siblings, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent must infer usage purely from the domain concept.

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