Doshas — KP Kemadruma

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true) indicate safe, readable operation. The description adds behavioral detail: the specific condition checked (planetary positions relative to Moon) and the involvement of KP Moon sub-lord chain. No contradictions with 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 short and to the point, with essential definition. Includes an example request body. The '[Group: Vedic]' tag is extraneous but not harmful. Could be slightly more structured, but overall concise.

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 11 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It mentions the yoga condition and sub-lord chain but lacks details on what exactly the tool returns (e.g., flag structure, sub-lord information). For a complex Vedic tool, more context is needed for proper usage.

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 0%—no parameters are described. The description does not explain the 11 parameters (date, time, timezone, coordinates, house system, zodiac type, etc.). An example request body is provided but does not clarify semantics. This is a significant gap for proper parameter usage.

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 clearly defines Kemadruma yoga as a check for no planets (excluding Sun, Rahu, Ketu) in 2nd or 12th from Moon, and identifies it as a moon-isolation flag for emotional/financial volatility. This is specific and distinct from sibling doshas tools, though it could be more explicit about the output being a boolean or flag.

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 other dosha or vedic analysis tools. No alternative tools or when-not use cases are mentioned. The agent must infer usage from the generic name and context.

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