KP — Planet cuspal positions

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds value by specifying output details (sidereal longitude, KP chain, Placidus house) and providing an example request, enhancing transparency without contradicting 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?

The description is brief (two sentences plus example JSON), front-loads key output details, and includes a practical example. It avoids verbosity but could be slightly more detailed without losing conciseness.

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?

With 11 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain the structure of the KP chain output, what planets are included, or how parameters like houseSystem or ayanamsaId affect results. The example only covers basic positional parameters, leaving significant gaps for effective tool usage.

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%. The description partially compensates by showing an example with date, time, timezoneOffset, latitude, longitude, but leaves many parameters unexplained (houseSystem, zodiacType, ayanamsaId, cosmogram). Agents must infer meaning from names or enums.

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 it provides for each planet: sidereal longitude, KP chain (sign/star/sub/sub-sub), and Placidus house occupied. This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from siblings like vedic_kp_cusps (house cusps) and vedic_kp_sub_lords (sub-lords only).

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 mentions 'Convenience layout for KP analyses' and provides an example, implying use when detailed planet positions for KP are needed. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use directives compared to alternatives (e.g., vedic_kp_cusps for house cusps only).

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