Jaimini — Karakamsa (AK in Navamsa)

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not repeat these. However, it adds no extra behavioral context beyond the purpose. The description does not contradict annotations, but provides minimal additional transparency.

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 at two sentences plus an example, with front-loaded main purpose. The example is somewhat lengthy but useful. Minor improvement could be integrating the example more smoothly or removing the group tag line.

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?

Despite annotations and schema providing some structure, the description lacks details on output format, which is crucial since there is no output schema. The tool has 11 parameters, many optional, but no guidance on how they influence results. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand tool behavior.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the 11 parameters. It only provides an example request without clarifying what each parameter represents or how they affect the calculation. This is a significant gap, as the description should compensate for low schema coverage.

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 states what the tool computes: 'Karakamsa — sign occupied by the Atmakaraka in the Navamsa (D9).' It provides astrological significance by referencing Jaimini Sutras and indicating soul-level destiny. This is distinct from numerous sibling tools like vedic_jaimini_karakas or vedic_varga_D9, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only provides a group tag '[Group: Vedic]' and an example request, but does not explain scenarios where this tool is appropriate or when other Jaimini tools (e.g., vedic_jaimini_chara_karakas) should be used instead.

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