Dashas: Ashtottari Antardasha

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

Annotations already declare this read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description still adds real context: the targetDate defaults to today UTC, the exact proportional formula used to size each sub-period, and the 20-credit Tier 2 cost — all useful for planning a call.

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 short sentences front-loaded with the result and the default, followed by a compact formula and terse group/endpoint/cost tags. The formula's P and Q are not spelled out as planets, a small ambiguity, but nothing is padded.

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-shape explanation is unnecessary, and the birth-data body is fully documented in the schema. The description supplies what the schema cannot: which mahadasha is being subdivided, how the sub-period length is derived, and the default target date — enough for an agent 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 effectively complete for the birth-data block, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond it by documenting the default of targetDate (today, UTC), a fact the schema itself does not state; targetTime and targetTzOffset remain unaddressed.

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?

Names the specific artifact — 8 antardasha sub-periods of the currently running Ashtottari mahadasha at a given target date — which maps precisely onto one rung of the dasha hierarchy and separates it from the maha/pratyantar/prana/sookshma siblings. It never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings in prose, so an agent must rely on the name to disambiguate the level.

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 running MD at targetDate (default today UTC)" implies the tool is for inspecting sub-periods of whichever mahadasha is active, including today by default. There is no explicit statement of when to pick antar rather than a coarser or finer level, and no mention of the other dasha families offered by siblings (vimshottari, yogini, chara).

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