Dashas — Kalachakra Pranadasha

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent behavior. The description adds that it is a '5-level cascade' with 'minutes-scale' precision, but does not explain what the output contains (e.g., list of periods, timestamps) or behavior when targetDate is omitted. Minimal added value beyond annotations.

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?

Extremely concise: one line specifying the dasha type and depth, one line for group/cost, and an illustrative example. No redundant text; key information is front-loaded.

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?

For a complex tool with nested input schema (allOf) and no output schema, the description lacks critical context: it does not explain the 5-level cascade, how the objects in allOf combine, or what the output looks like. Sibling tools are numerous, but no differentiation is provided beyond grain size.

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 includes descriptions for the input fields (e.g., date/time required, defaults for lat/lon/tz). The tool description only provides an example, adding no new semantic information about parameters like targetDate, targetTime, or their meanings.

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 'Kalachakra Pranadasha — 5-level cascade (finest grain — minutes-scale at full depth)', which clearly identifies the specific dasha type and its granularity. The verb is implied (calculates) and it is differentiated from sibling dashas like maha or antar by mentioning 'prana' and depth 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other Kalachakra dasha tools (e.g., maha, antar) or other dashas. The example includes a targetDate, hinting at usage for a specific date, but no when-not or alternative comparisons are provided.

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