Life Path Number (vedic)

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: the 10-credit Tier 1 cost and the reduction method (year+month+day reduced). It does not say what a result looks like or whether the reduction differs materially from other systems' life-path calculation.

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?

One tight sentence that front-loads the operation and method, followed by a scannable bracketed metadata block. No filler; the brevity is only slightly costly because the skimped content is the parameter explanation.

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 values need no explanation, and the two-parameter surface is small. Still, the unexplained 'name' parameter and the undisclosed date format are gaps an agent hits at call time, keeping this at minimum-viable completeness.

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 and largely fails. It clarifies that date is a birth date, but never states the YYYY-MM-DD format that the schema pattern enforces, and it leaves the required 'name' parameter completely unexplained on a tool whose output is a number derived from a date.

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 and resource ('Calculate the Life Path number from birth date') and pins the system ('Vedic'). This implicitly separates it from the Chaldean/Pythagorean/Kabbalistic life-path siblings, but it never names those alternatives, so the differentiation is left to the agent's inference from the group label.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no alternatives. The only steering is the metadata block ('Required: name, date', 'Cost: 10 credits'), which tells the agent nothing about choosing Vedic over Chaldean or Pythagorean life path, or when a life-path lookup is the right call at all.

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