Doshas — KP Sade Sati

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds context about the output (active phase with sub-lord chain) and explains the Sade Sati period. This provides behavioral insight beyond annotations, though it doesn't detail side effects or further behavior.

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 concise (two sentences plus example) and front-loaded with purpose. It includes a group tag and example. However, it could be more structured by including parameter details. It is not verbose, earning a high score for efficiency.

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 11 parameters with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It minimally explains the return value (active phase with sub-lord chain) but lacks details on how to use parameters or interpret output. The example partially compensates, but overall the description is insufficient for correct tool invocation.

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%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist. The description only gives an example with some parameters but does not explain the meaning or usage of any parameter. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the agent to guess parameter semantics.

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 the tool's purpose: computing Sade Sati state at a target date. It explains the concept of Sade Sati (Saturn transit through 12th/1st/2nd from natal Moon, 7.5 years) and specifies the output (active phase with KP Saturn sub-lord chain). This distinguishes it from sibling dosha tools like vedic_doshas_kp_full.

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 implies usage for assessing Sade Sati on a specific date, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs other dosha tools (e.g., vedic_doshas_kp_kalasarpa). No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned; usage is inferred from the example and context.

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