Porutham: Vedhai

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that — the endpoint, the 50-credit Tier 3 cost, and the fact that it mirrors the Vedha factor inside /porutham — but it does not discuss authentication, rate limits, or what the response includes.

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 core sentence is front-loaded and efficient: it names the factor, its component stars, and its relationship to the full porutham. The bracketed metadata block adds cost and endpoint information without excessive verbosity.

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?

The description is adequate for a specialized single-factor tool with an output schema, but it does not explain the school parameter or clarify how chart1 and chart2 map to bride and groom. For a tool taking nested birth-data objects, that leaves some operational gaps.

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?

With schema description coverage at 33%, the description should compensate, but it only repeats '[Required: chart1, chart2]' which the schema already enforces. It says nothing about the school parameter (tamil/kerala) or the bride/groom counting direction, even though those details exist in the schema rather than the description.

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 states a specific astrological factor: 'Vedha porutham alone: 12 mutually piercing star pairs plus the Mrigashira-Chitra-Dhanishta triad.' It distinguishes this tool from the broader '/porutham' factor set by noting 'Same function as the factor inside /porutham,' so an agent can tell it computes one component rather than the full compatibility suite.

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 phrase 'alone' and 'Same function as the factor inside /porutham' imply this is the single-factor variant, but the description never explicitly says when to choose it over the sibling full porutham tool. There are no exclusions or prerequisite notes beyond the required chart1 and chart2 fields.

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