divine_get_chandrashtama

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

Annotations already signal readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the result is month-scoped, organized per moon sign, and the day parameter narrows to one date. It does not contradict the 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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: a direct action statement, a brief domain definition, and a result/filter note. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With a read-only, idempotent tool, an output schema, and a clear scope, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand what to request and how to narrow it. The domain explanation resolves ambiguity, and the required structural details are carried by the schema.

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 adds meaning by grouping required inputs as 'month and location' and highlighting the optional day. However, context reports 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not compensate for all parameters such as lat/lon/tzone, year, or language. It is helpful but incomplete as a standalone parameter guide.

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 specific resource 'Chandrashtama periods', and adds enough domain context to distinguish it from dozens of panchang and timing siblings. It also describes what the output looks like: month periods per moon sign, with optional narrowing by day.

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 clear context for when this is relevant ('considered inauspicious for new ventures') and an explicit usage lever ('set day to narrow to a specific date'). It does not name alternative tools or exclusions, but the use case is reasonably unambiguous among the siblings.

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