Ghat Chakra

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it clarifies that Moon sign is computed from birth data, that no prior setup is needed, and that the result is a static lookup rather than a daily score. It also links to the full output and error contract.

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 organized into labeled sections (WORKFLOW, INPUT CONTRACT, DO NOT CONFUSE) with the core purpose front-loaded. Each section adds distinct value, and the documentation link is compact. There is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

For a read-only lookup with a full input schema, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers prerequisites, follow-up usage, sibling disambiguation, and points to the full output/error contract. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by stating that the birth object is the sole input and that Moon sign is derived from it, which is not explicit in the schema. The INPUT CONTRACT also summarizes the relevant birth fields (date, time, lat, lon, timezone).

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 ('Returns'), a specific resource ('four Ghatak (inauspicious) timing parameters'), and the basis ('Janma Rasi (natal Moon sign)'). The DO NOT CONFUSE section explicitly separates it from asterwise_get_nakshatra_prediction and asterwise_get_panchanga, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings.

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 WORKFLOW section explicitly states no prerequisites ('BEFORE: None') and recommends a follow-up tool ('AFTER: asterwise_get_nakshatra_prediction') for daily auspiciousness. DO NOT CONFUSE names two alternatives and explains why they differ, giving clear when-to-use guidance.

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