Dashas — Shatabdika Sookshmadasha

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds only '4-level cascade', hinting at hierarchical computation, but does not explain what the tool returns, how it processes the input, or any side effects. It adds minimal 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?

The description is extremely concise: one line plus an example. It front-loads the key information (name and level) without waste. However, it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness, e.g., briefly stating the output.

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 tool is complex (4-level cascade, target-date computation), but the description lacks any mention of return value or output format. No output schema exists, so the description should compensate by stating what the result contains (e.g., period dates, planetary lords). The example only shows input, not output.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description provides an example request body, which helps illustrate the required structure and format (e.g., date, time, timezoneOffset). However, it does not explain the purpose of targetDate or other parameters explicitly; the schema already includes descriptions.

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 explicitly states 'Shatabdika Sookshmadasha — 4-level cascade', clearly identifying the tool as the sookshma (sub-sub-sub) level of the Shatabdika dasha system. The title and group ('Vedic') further distinguish it from numerous sibling dasha tools for other systems and levels.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other dasha tools or levels. The description does not mention prerequisites, for example, that birth data is needed or that targetDate is required for computing sookshma periods. Alternatives (e.g., other dasha systems like Vimshottari) are not referenced.

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