divine_get_auspicious_timings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minor context about the output (favorable time windows, specific muhurat types) but does not go beyond what the annotations already imply. It does not contradict annotations.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by clarifying details. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff. It is well-structured for quick scanning.

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?

The description covers the core purpose and output but lacks critical usage context regarding when to use this general muhurat tool versus the numerous specific muhurat siblings (e.g., marriage, vehicle purchase). Given the high number of related tools, an agent could easily confuse this with a specific muhurat tool. The presence of an output schema and comprehensive parameter documentation mitigates some gaps, but the absence of usage guidance makes it incomplete for correct tool selection.

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?

The description does not mention any parameters. The input schema has a top-level parameter 'params' with no description, and the nested properties (day, month, year, place, lat, lon, tzone, lan) do have descriptions in the schema, but the schema_description_coverage is effectively 0% for the top-level. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate by explaining key required inputs, but it does not. The agent must rely entirely on the nested schema, which is comprehensive, but the description adds zero value for parameters.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'auspicious timings (shubh muhurat)' for a given date and location. It further explains the return content with examples (weddings, house-warming, travel) and mentions specific muhurat types (Abhijit Muhurat, Amrit Kaal). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like divine_get_muhurat_marriage or divine_get_muhurat_house_entering, which focus on single activities.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling muhurat-specific tools (e.g., divine_get_muhurat_marriage, divine_get_muhurat_vehicle_purchase). It does not state that this is the general-purpose auspicious timings tool and that for specific activities one should use the dedicated muhurat tools. The distinction is only implicit through the naming, which is insufficient.

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