Jaimini — Karakas (Chara + Naisargika)

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

Annotations already indicate safe, idempotent, read-only behavior. The description adds algorithmic context (source texts, ranking method), which is useful but does not reveal potential side effects or limitations beyond annotations. No 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?

Description is efficient, front-loading purpose and grouping concepts. Includes source references and a group tag, which add context without significant bloat. Could be slightly trimmed but remains 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?

Lacks output schema, so description should describe return values. It mentions chara and naisargika karakas but not their structure or format. With 11 parameters and no output details, the agent may not know how to use the result or configure additional parameters beyond the example.

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 only provides an example with 5 of the 11 parameters, omitting details for houseSystem, zodiacType, ayanamsaId, cosmogram, etc. The example is helpful but insufficient for full parameter understanding.

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 that the tool computes both chara karakas (8-planet ranking) and naisargika karakas (fixed planet-house mapping), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'vedic_jaimini_chara_karakas' which likely only does chara karakas. However, it does not explicitly compare with all Jaimini siblings.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like vedic_jaimini_chara_karakas or other Jaimini tools. The example request body shows some parameters but does not explain selection criteria. Lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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