divine_get_lal_kitab_varshphal_planetary_positions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns planet placements in the annual chart, but does not disclose details like whether the output is a list, how positions are formatted, or any special behavior. 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 short and front-loaded with the key purpose. The second sentence is somewhat redundant with the first, but the overall length is appropriate and every sentence is relevant.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description is adequate for a read-only lookup. However, with many similar sibling tools, it could be more complete by explicitly distinguishing itself from divine_get_lal_kitab_planetary_positions and divine_get_varshphal_planetary_positions.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds the meaning of varshphal_year ('chosen year') and clarifies the output is for the annual chart, but it does not add detail beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Lal Kitab varshphal (annual chart) planetary positions'), and clarifies it returns planet placements for a chosen year. It is clear enough to distinguish from the many sibling tools, though it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 implies usage: call this when you need planetary positions in a Lal Kitab annual chart for a specific year. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like divine_get_lal_kitab_planetary_positions or divine_get_varshphal_planetary_positions, which are close siblings.

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