Vimshottari dasha standing and full timeline for birth data: current maha / antar / pratyantar dasha plus every maha-dasha period with start and end dates. Deterministic, no LLM. Same compute path as POST /api/b2b/dasha.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| birth_data | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / birth_data / properties / placeRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Birth place as a name (e.g. \"Jaipur\"). Resolved server-side through the same geocoder the bot uses, so an agent never has to guess coordinates. Supply EITHER place OR lat/lng/tz; if both are present, the explicit coordinates win.",
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / birth_data / properties / tz / descriptionPrevious value: -"UTC offset (e.g. 5.5) or IANA zone name (e.g. Asia/Kolkata). Required alongside lat/lng; ignored when `place` is used."New value: +"UTC offset (e.g. 5.5) or IANA zone name (e.g. Asia/Kolkata)."Input schema / properties / birth_data / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "dob",
- "tob"
-]New value: +[
+ "dob",
+ "tob",
+ "lat",
+ "lng",
+ "tz"
+]Input schema / properties / birth_data / properties / placeAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Birth place as a name (e.g. \"Jaipur\"). Resolved server-side through the same geocoder the bot uses, so an agent never has to guess coordinates. Supply EITHER place OR lat/lng/tz; if both are present, the explicit coordinates win.",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / properties / birth_data / properties / tz / descriptionPrevious value: -"UTC offset (e.g. 5.5) or IANA zone name (e.g. Asia/Kolkata)."New value: +"UTC offset (e.g. 5.5) or IANA zone name (e.g. Asia/Kolkata). Required alongside lat/lng; ignored when `place` is used."Input schema / properties / birth_data / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "dob",
- "tob",
- "lat",
- "lng",
- "tz"
-]New value: +[
+ "dob",
+ "tob"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does add one genuinely useful trait: 'Deterministic, no LLM,' which tells the agent results are reproducible and not model-generated. However it omits the safety profile (implicitly a read), error behavior for invalid birth data, and any latency/rate context, so it is only partially transparent.
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 short sentences, front-loaded on what is returned, with zero filler. The final API-parity sentence ('Same compute path as POST /api/b2b/dasha') is the weakest, but it does signal identical compute semantics for API consumers.
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?
It conveys the output content (current sub-periods plus every maha-dasha period), which is needed since there is no output schema, but it says nothing about date formatting, ordering, or how to interpret the timeline. Adequate but with clear gaps for a single-param compute endpoint.
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?
One nested parameter with 0% top-level description coverage, so per the rubric the description should compensate; 'for birth data' only restates the schema key. The nested fields (dob, tob, lat, lng, tz) are self-documented inside the schema, which keeps this from being a serious gap.
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 and scope: Vimshottari dasha standing (current maha/antar/pratyantar levels) plus the full maha-dasha timeline with start and end dates. That content specification is detailed enough to tell it apart from generic siblings like get_chart_facts or get_forecast 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?
It states the input domain ('for birth data') but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and never names an alternative such as get_forecast or get_doshas. The agent must infer that dasha-timeline questions route here.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.