divine_get_tamil_festivals

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and idempotent, and the description adds useful behavioral detail: it returns festival names, dates, and images, and frames the result as 'major' festivals. This aligns with the openWorldHint without contradicting any annotation.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds concrete examples and output details. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 is adequate for invoking the tool, especially with full parameter coverage and an output schema available. However, it does not explain why location and timezone parameters affect Tamil festival dates, nor does it position this tool against nearby siblings like divine_get_festivals_by_date or divine_get_malayalam_festivals. These are meaningful gaps for an agent choosing among many similar festival 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter semantics are already well documented in the input schema. The description only reinforces the 'year' parameter and does not add meaning for place, lat, lon, or tzone, which is acceptable given the schema carries that burden.

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 gets 'major Tamil festivals for a year' and names representative festivals like Thai Pongal and Puthandu. It is specific about the resource (Tamil festivals) and the scope (yearly), which helps distinguish it from sibling festival tools even though it does not explicitly say what it is not.

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 'for a year' provides clear usage context: this tool is appropriate when the agent needs an annual list of Tamil festivals. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like by-date or by-month festival tools, but the Tamil + yearly framing is enough to guide selection among the festival-related siblings.

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