Core Numbers Chart (vedic)

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

Annotations already establish readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds value beyond them: credit cost, batch-versus-single pricing, and the localization contract ('translated: false' with English text while a language's strings are pending). It does not describe error or partial-result behavior when a language is untranslated.

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?

Front-loaded with the payoff (six numbers in one call) followed by cost rationale and localization caveat, which is the right order. Minor waste: the 20-credit cost is stated twice, once inline and again in the trailing '[Cost: 20 credits (Tier 2)]' block.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary and the description correctly focuses on the bundle contents and localization behavior. It is nearly complete for a read-only calculation tool, missing only `name` input conventions.

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 only 33% (only `year` is documented), so the description must compensate: it does cover the `year` default and lists name/date as required, but it never says whether `name` should be the full birth-certificate name, a nickname, or its casing/spacing rules, which is semantically decisive for numerology.

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 action and enumerates the exact six outputs (Life Path, Expression, Soul Urge, Personality, Birthday, Personal Year), which lets an agent distinguish it from the single-number vedic siblings such as astroway_numerology_vedic_life_path without opening a schema.

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?

Says when to use it via the cost contrast ('20 credits instead of 60 for six single calls'), implicitly routing single-number requests to the individual tools. It does not state an explicit exclusion or prerequisite, so it falls short of the 5 bar.

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