Expression / Destiny (vedic)

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds useful cost information ('10 credits (Tier 1)') and required inputs, but does not describe rate limits, permissions, or calculation behavior beyond the name-letter reduction.

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 short and front-loads the core calculation method. The bracketed metadata lines are structured and useful, though they add some overhead beyond a purely prose description.

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?

Output schema exists, so return-value details are not needed. The tool is simple with two required parameters, and the description covers methodology, system, cost, and required inputs. However, the missing explanation of the date parameter leaves a clear gap for an agent deciding how to call it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that the name parameter should be the 'full birth name' with 'all letters, reduced', but it does not explain the 'date' parameter at all beyond repeating that it is required. This leaves a significant semantic gap for one of two parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('Expression (Destiny) number') and states the input basis ('full birth name letters') and system ('Vedic'). It is distinguishable from Chaldean and Pythagorean expression siblings via the Vedic label, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this Vedic expression tool over the many sibling expression tools (Chaldean, Pythagorean, Kabbalistic). The label 'Numerology: Vedic system' implies context but gives no exclusions or decision criteria.

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