Doshas — Guru-Chandal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds the specific condition (Jupiter+Rahu/Ketu conjunction) and cost context. No contradictions. Could further mention output nature.

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 with no fluff, delivering key information in four sentences. The example is useful. Could be more structured by grouping metadata (Group, Cost) separately.

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 tool has 11 parameters, no output schema, and complex context (vedic dosha), the description lacks important details: all parameter meanings, output format or examples, and guidance on when to use this specific tool over the full dosha analysis. The example covers only a subset of parameters.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides an example with only 5 of 11 parameters (date, time, timezoneOffset, latitude, longitude) but does not explain the purpose of other parameters (houseSystem, zodiacType, ayanamsaId, etc.) or that they have defaults.

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 identifies the specific Vedic dosha (Guru-Chandal) involving Jupiter conjunct Rahu or Ketu, with a clear consequence (wisdom-confusion affliction). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that cover other doshas or full dosha analysis.

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 checking Guru-Chandal Dosha but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'vedic_doshas_parashara_full'. No when-not or context for selecting this specific dosha.

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