Muhurat: Education start (Vidyarambha)

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds real context beyond that: the 50-credit Tier-3 cost, the endpoint, the required input, and the actual scanning logic (preferred nakshatras, avoid Sun/Tue/Sat). It does not cover result ordering or window-sizing, but with an output schema present that is acceptable.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and rules, then compact bracketed metadata. The nakshatra list is long but genuinely informative rather than filler; 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?

With an output schema and read-only annotations, the safety and return-shape burden is lifted, but for an 8-parameter geospatial+timing tool the description leaves the key location/window parameters and their effect on results unexplained. Adequate to call correctly with defaults, not adequate to call well.

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 only 25% across 8 parameters, so the description needs to compensate and does not. It restates only the required search_window_start and says nothing about latitude/longitude (which drive local sunrise-based muhurat calculations), search_window_end, or topN — all undocumented or barely documented in the schema.

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 (auspicious-window scanner), a specific resource (start of formal education / Vidyarambha), and the domain rule set for what makes a window valid. This event-specific scope distinguishes it cleanly from the many sibling muhurat tools (business_start, marriage, property_purchase, general_auspicious).

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 event scope implies when to use it, but it never explicitly routes between itself and alternatives like astroway_vedic_muhurat_general_auspicious, astroway_vedic_muhurat_naming_ceremony, or astroway_reports_muhurta. No exclusions or selection criteria are given.

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