Guna Milan Compatibility

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by specifying what the tool returns (koota-wise breakdown, total out of 36, dosha findings) without contradicting annotations. No mention of side effects, which is consistent.

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 sentences with no extraneous information. Front-loaded with the primary action and followed by return details. 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description enumerates key return components. The nested object parameters are explained via schema and source hint. Minor gap: exact return structure is not detailed, but sufficient for agent decision-making.

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%, providing basic parameter roles. The description adds context that inputs should be from 'calculate_kundali' and clarifies bride/groom assignment. This exceeds the baseline of 3 for full schema 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?

The description explicitly states it calculates Guna Milan (Ashtakoot, 36-point) marriage compatibility between two kundali JSONs, specifies bride/groom roles, and lists return details. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like calculate_dasha or calculate_gochar.

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 implies when to use (when two kundalis are available for marriage compatibility) and mentions input sources (from calculate_kundali). However, it lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool suggestions.

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