divine_get_varshphal_yogini_dasha

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds little beyond the name and schema; 'for the given year' hints at the varshphal_year parameter but does not disclose any deeper behavioral traits such as response format limitations or edge cases.

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 sentence that front-loads the core verb and resource, with zero filler. Every word earns its place, making it efficient and immediately scannable.

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 minimal but adequate given the existence of a rich output schema and strong annotations. However, with over a hundred sibling tools and several close Varshphal variants, the description could have benefited from a note distinguishing it from divine_get_yogini_dasha or other annual dasha 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 schema fully documents every parameter including the complex KundliInput nested object. The description only summarizes the inputs as 'year and birth data', which adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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'), a specific resource ('Varshphal Yogini Dasha'), and scope ('for the given year and birth data'). The parenthetical '(annual chart)' clarifies the context and differentiates it from siblings like divine_get_yogini_dasha, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 clear context by specifying 'Varshphal' (annual) and 'for the given year and birth data', which indicates when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the annual-chart framing implicitly distinguishes it from regular Yogini Dasha and other Dasha tools.

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