Lal Kitab — Planet-in-house effect

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description adds that the tool returns a 'Short summary' and that data is placeholder for most planets. This provides useful behavioral context 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 concise at three sentences plus an example. It front-loads the purpose and includes essential parameter info. The placeholder note inside parentheses slightly reduces readability but overall is 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?

The description lacks details about the output format (e.g., plain text, JSON) and does not fully clarify parameter validation given the schema mismatch. For a simple lookup tool, it is adequate but could better prepare the agent for the actual response and constraints.

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 coverage, the description explains the meaning and valid ranges for both parameters: planet (0..6, 11=Rahu, 100=Ketu) and house (1..12). This adds critical value beyond the schema, though the schema's overly broad integer range for planet is not addressed.

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 a 'Short summary of a (planet, house) placement per LK', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling Lal Kitab tools by focusing on individual planet-house placements, though it could be more explicit about the summary content.

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 tells the caller to pass `planet` and `house` and provides an example request body. It also notes the current limitation (Sun-only full data) which guides usage expectations. However, it does not suggest alternatives for other planets or when not to use this tool.

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