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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions choghadiyas, abhijit, and 'valid or removed by some rule', but does not explain how results are computed, what rules apply, or any limitations. It also omits details on parameter requirements or edge cases.

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 concise, two sentences, and front-loads the core functionality. It is efficient, though phrases like 'годен или снят каким правилом' introduce slight ambiguity without affecting overall structure.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description lacks guidance on how to specify location, date range format, or any required inputs. For a tool with 5 optional parameters, more context is needed for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not explain any of the five parameters (city, lang, date_to, date_from, geonameid). The only hint is the date range concept, which is not mapped to the actual parameter names.

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 clearly states the tool searches for good days and hours over a segment up to 31 days, and explicitly notes it is a general selection, not for a specific purpose. This provides a specific verb and resource, but does not name any sibling tool for differentiation.

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 description gives a clear exclusion: it is not for a specific matter, implying it is for general use. However, it does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when to choose this over others like panchanga, leaving some ambiguity.

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