divine_get_kp_cuspal_significator

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false, so no contradiction exists. The description adds behavioral context by describing the output as a 'comprehensive table' with house significations as star lord and sub lord, giving a clear sense of the response shape.

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 succinct sentences: the first names the resource, the second defines its content and significance. There is no filler, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 richly documented input schema, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description provides enough context for an agent to understand what the tool returns. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit differentiation among the many KP sibling tools, though the specialized name and content description mitigate this.

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 100%, with all birth details and node_type already fully documented. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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, 'KP Planetary-Cuspal Significator Table', and elaborates its function: 'showing which houses each planet signifies as star lord and sub lord'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling KP tools like divine_get_kp_cuspal or divine_get_kp_planetary_sub.

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 phrase 'Core of KP prediction methodology' implies usage for KP predictions, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The large sibling list makes this more ambiguous than necessary.

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