Jaimini — Padas (Bhava/Surya/Chandra/Graha Arudhas)

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds specific calculation details (1/7-trim rule per BPHS Adhyaya 26 verse 4), enhancing transparency beyond 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?

Two sentences plus an example; no fluff. The example is useful but not essential. Could be slightly more concise without example, but still efficient.

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?

Adequate for a calculation tool: lists outputs and a rule reference. However, missing output structure description (no output schema) and parameter semantics leaves gaps for an agent unfamiliar with Vedic astrology.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 11 parameters, the description provides no parameter explanations beyond an example request. It fails to describe optional fields like houseSystem, zodiacType, ayanamsaId, or cosmogram.

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 explicitly lists all canonical Arudhas (A1..A12, S1..S12, M1..M12, Graha Arudhas) with specific naming, distinguishing it from sibling Jaimini tools like argala analysis or karakas.

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 direct comparison with alternatives or when-not-to-use. The [Group: Vedic] hints at context, but no exclusions or sibling differentiation are provided.

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