divine_get_kaal_chakra_dasha

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

Annotations already mark it readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description does not contradict those. It adds algorithmic context (Parashar's nakshatra pada-to-sign mapping) rather than operational behavior such as period format, number of periods, or response structure, so it provides only partial additional transparency.

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?

About two short paragraphs with no filler, and the main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence. The second sentence provides useful distinguishing background but could be tightened.

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 rich input schema, output schema, and safety annotations fill most operational gaps, so the tool is callable from description plus schema. It still lacks guidance on how or why to select this dasha system relative to the many sibling dasha tools.

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 says nothing about the required full birth details, and top-level schema coverage is 0%, so it does not compensate for the missing parameter description. The nested KundliInput fields are well described in the schema, which prevents this from being a complete failure.

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 opens with a specific verb and object ('Get Kaal Chakra Dasha periods') and adds a differentiating explanation of the calculation basis (nakshatra-based, Parashar, pada-to-sign mapping). It is not a mere restatement of the name, but it never explicitly names how it differs from sibling dasha tools such as vimshottari or yogini dasha.

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 guidance on when to choose this over any of the dozens of sibling dasha, panchang, or transit tools, and no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tool names. The only implied context is that it applies to a birth chart, which is not enough to route among the sibling set.

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