divine_get_sub_planet_positions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the result includes sign, degree, and nakshatra details for the listed sub-planets, but does not disclose response structure, limitations, or edge cases. 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?

Two short sentences: the first states the operation and the second summarizes the output contents. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 description covers the purpose and output content, and the output schema plus the rich nested input schema fill many gaps. However, given the very large sibling set and lack of usage guidance or parameter context, an agent gets only a minimal map of when this tool is the right choice. Adequate but not complete.

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 contributes no parameter-level explanation beyond 'for a birth chart,' and the top-level schema exposes only a $ref 'params' with no description (schema description coverage is 0%). Although the nested KundliInput properties have descriptions, the tool description itself does not help an agent map birth details to this call, so it fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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?

States a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('sub-planet (Upagraha) positions'), and enumerates the specific sub-planets returned (Dhuma, Vyatipata, Parivesha, Indra Chapa, Upaketu) with sign, degree, and nakshatra details. This is enough to distinguish it from the sibling divine_get_sub_planet_chart, which is chart-focused.

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?

Provides clear context that this is for a birth chart, but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose it over alternatives such as divine_get_sub_planet_chart or divine_get_planetary_positions. No exclusions, conditionals, or sibling routing are provided.

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