divine_get_other_calendars_and_epoch

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 the concrete output systems returned, which is useful context, but it does not add behavioral details such as failure modes or effects of location/timezone inputs. No contradiction with 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 tight sentences with no filler. It front-loads the purpose and then lists the specific return values. Every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only annotations and an output schema present, the description is mostly adequate for a simple lookup tool. However, it lacks sibling differentiation and does not signal the required location/timezone parameters, which prevents it from being fully self-sufficient.

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 tool description only mentions 'a given date' and does not explain that place, latitude, longitude, and timezone are required inputs. Per the context signal, schema description coverage is 0% at the parameter level, so the description should compensate but does not.

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 tool returns dates in other calendar systems and epoch values, and names the specific conversions: Vikram Samvat, Shaka Samvat, Kali Yuga, and Julian day numbers. This is a specific verb+resource description, but it does not explicitly differentiate from closely related siblings such as divine_get_samvat.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor any mention of alternatives. However, the phrasing 'Returns conversions to...' implies the use case: when a caller needs alternate calendar or epoch conversions for a date.

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