Dashas: Shodashottari Pranadasha

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world). The description adds genuinely useful behavior the annotations do not: the POST endpoint and a concrete cost of 20 credits (Tier 2), which matters for an agent budgeting calls. It says nothing about response shape, but an output schema exists.

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 front-loaded line plus structured metadata with zero filler. It borders on under-specification rather than padding, which is penalized on other dimensions, not this one.

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 rich input schema, existing output schema and annotations carry most of the load, so the definition is usable. Still, for an esoteric 5-level dasha with five co-existing sibling variants, a sentence on what the prana level yields and how it differs from sookshma would close a real gap.

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?

Only one parameter (body) and schema description coverage is 100%, including detailed notes on timezone, ayanamsa, and houseSystem. The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so baseline 3 applies; notably it never mentions that the body carries birth data or the optional targetDate/targetTime targeting fields.

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 resource (Shodashottari Pranadasha) and qualifies it as the '5-level cascade (finest grain)', which lets an agent place it relative to the coarser shodashottari siblings. However, there is no verb – it never says it computes/returns dasha periods – and 'prana' is left unexplained, so an agent unfamiliar with the Vedic dasha hierarchy gets little.

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 parenthetical '(finest grain)' implies you pick this variant when you need the deepest sub-period level, which is real relative guidance against the four shodashottari siblings. But no sibling is named, there is no explicit when-not condition, and no prerequisite (birth data with date/time/coordinates) is stated.

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