Planetary Return

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds that full charts are produced per return and, via the metadata block, a cost of 50 credits (Tier 3) and the POST endpoint — genuinely useful non-schema context, but nothing about how many returns to expect or rate/error behavior.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by clearly labeled group/endpoint/cost metadata. No filler, though the cost line is the only part that could arguably belong elsewhere.

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?

With an output schema present and a thoroughly annotated input schema, the description only needs to frame the computation, which it does, plus the cost. The main residual gap is the unenumerated planetId and the absence of any note about how many returns are typical.

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 100% and the nested body schema documents date/time/latitude/longitude/timezone/ayanamsa/houseSystem in detail, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing about planetId (which has no enum) or the meaning of year versus the natal 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 ('Find all returns of any planet to its natal longitude within a given year') and adds the output nature ('Returns full charts'). It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from astroway_prognostics_solar_return and astroway_prognostics_lunar_return, though 'any planet' implicitly subsumes 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?

No guidance on when to pick this over solar_return, lunar_return, phase_return, or transit_calendar, nor prerequisites such as needing natal birth data. The 'within a given year' scope is the only situational hint.

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