Dashas — Tribhagi Pranadasha

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds only the phrase '5-level cascade (finest grain)', which hints at computational depth but does not detail behavior (e.g., returns subdivisions, requires specific inputs). No annotation contradiction.

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 very short (one line plus example), which is concise but lacks substance. It front-loads the name and level but misses key details. While not verbose, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity.

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?

Given the high complexity of Vedic dasha systems and the presence of many sibling dasha tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what a 'pranadasha' is, the significance of 'finest grain', or what the output contains. An agent cannot reliably understand when to invoke this tool.

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 input schema already describes all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, providing no syntactic or semantic clarification. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names the dasha system ('Tribhagi Pranadasha') and mentions '5-level cascade (finest grain)', which hints at the tool's function. However, it lacks a clear verb+resource statement (e.g., 'computes the prana sub-period'). With many sibling dasha tools, this is insufficient to distinguish from similar tools like vedic_dashas_tribhagi_antar or vedic_dashas_tribhagi_sookshma.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or compare with other dasha tools. The example request body is present but does not clarify usage context.

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