Dasha Transits

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description adds behavioral details: it performs today's transit correlation, returns scored correlations, and requires only birth data. No contradictions with 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 first sentence is a clear purpose statement and the uppercase sections help scannability, but the description is longer than necessary with some redundancy (AFTER vs DO NOT CONFUSE WITH and the final URL).

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 complete for use: it covers output content, workflow, today's fixed date, alternatives, and points to the full output/error contract. Since an output schema exists, not detailing return values is acceptable.

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 the baseline is 3; description adds meaningful context by clarifying that there is no date parameter and that birth data follows a global contract, while the schema already documents each field with examples and constraints. The wording around unknown birth time is slightly opaque, preventing a 5.

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 names a specific verb and resource: combines active Vimshottari lords with today's transits, returning scored correlations plus transit longitudes and houses. The title and sibling list make it distinct from asterwise_get_gochar, asterwise_get_transits, and asterwise_get_dasha.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance: natal chart is recommended before, gochar is optional after, and DO NOT CONFUSE WITH statements differentiate the three closest sibling tools. It also states that no date field is needed because 'today' is fixed by the API.

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