Doshas

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

The description adds behavioral details not covered by annotations, such as 'Unknown birth time at midnight is accepted silently,' and clarifies output types like 'presence flags, typed detail objects, optional summaries, and remedy lines.' These enrich the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint already present.

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 well-structured with clear sections (WORKFLOW, INPUT CONTRACT, DO NOT CONFUSE WITH), each serving a distinct purpose. It is concise yet comprehensive, avoiding redundancy while covering essential operational aspects.

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 includes the input contract, workflow context, differentiation from siblings, and a link to the full output/error contract. Given the tool's moderate complexity, this provides sufficient context for correct usage without needing to restate every schema detail.

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?

While the schema already provides detailed descriptions for parameters, the description adds valuable semantics by noting that omitting birth time uses a sunrise chart and sets birth_time_provided=false, clarifying the behavior for the 'time' field. This goes beyond the schema's basic default description.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Scores twelve fixed dosha buckets from birth data and returns presence flags, typed detail objects, optional summaries, and remedy lines per dosha.' It also explicitly differentiates from similar tools like asterwise_get_chart_strength and asterwise_get_compatibility, making its unique 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 explicit when-to-use guidance with 'WORKFLOW: BEFORE: RECOMMENDED — asterwise_get_natal_chart' and 'AFTER: asterwise_get_remedies.' It also includes a 'DO NOT CONFUSE WITH' section that names alternatives and explains why they should not be chosen instead.

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