divine_get_varshphal_tri_pataki_chakra

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 only that this is an annual chart computation, without detailing response structure, error potential, or any special behavior. This is acceptable but not rich.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the resource name and immediately specifies the required inputs. There is no redundancy or filler; every phrase 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?

For a simple two-parameter read-only tool with a full input schema and an output schema, the description is largely complete. A small gap remains in not explaining the specialized 'Tri Pataki Chakra' concept or the fact that the full KundliInput requires all birth fields, though the schema already conveys this.

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%: both 'varshphal_year' and the nested birth-details object are documented in the schema. The description merely restates 'given year and birth data,' adding no meaning beyond the schema, 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and names a precise resource ('Varshphal Tri Pataki Chakra (annual chart)'), clearly indicating both the operation and the input scope (year and birth data). The unique resource name distinguishes it from the many varshphal sibling tools even without deeper explanation.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as divine_get_varshphal_horoscope_chart or divine_get_varshphal_muntha. The description implies general annual-chart use but offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison to sibling tools.

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