Calculate Gochar (Transits)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: it names the exact computational scope (natal Moon and Lagna) and the interoperability contract ('gochar JSON accepted by the report tools'), which tells the agent the output feeds other tools.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the core computation and followed by the return contract. Nothing is wasted.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description characterizes the return value as gochar JSON consumed by the report tools, which is sufficient orientation. Minor gaps remain around prerequisite chaining and error behavior for a nested kundali input.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (kundali, on_date) are already documented in the schema, including the default of today. The description adds no format or syntax detail 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?

States a specific verb (compute) and resource (gochar planetary transits relative to natal Moon and Lagna), plus the Sade Sati/Dhaiya phase. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like calculate_dasha, calculate_panchang, and calculate_kundali.

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 usage by noting the output is accepted by the report tools, which hints at downstream chaining, and the schema requires a kundali from calculate_kundali. However, it never explicitly states when to call this versus the other calculation tools or what the prerequisite ordering is.

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