divine_get_varshphal_basic_astro_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as rate limits, output format, or side effects beyond the simple read-only 'Get', which matches the 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that starts with the action and resource, includes the key qualifier 'annual chart', and contains no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for its simplicity.

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 output schema and annotations present, the description is minimally adequate but omits useful context such as what 'basic astro details' actually comprises and how this tool differs from the non-varshphal divine_get_basic_astro_details or other varshphal variants. An agent might struggle to select it correctly among the many similar siblings.

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 parameters (varshphal_year and params with full KundliInput fields) are already well documented. The description's phrase 'given year and birth data' adds no semantic value beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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'), resource ('Varshphal Basic Astro Details'), and context ('annual chart', 'given year and birth data'). It is clear enough to distinguish from the many varshphal* siblings, but it does not explicitly name alternatives like divine_get_basic_astro_details or enumerate what 'basic astro details' includes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as divine_get_varshphal_planetary_positions or divine_get_basic_astro_details. It merely describes the operation without context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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