Lal Kitab — Varshphal (annual)

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint true, destructiveHint false, idempotentHint true. The description adds that it returns a dasha house and solar-return JD, which is consistent. No contradictions; the description provides additional output context 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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences plus a group label and example. Every part adds value. No extraneous text.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description explicitly states the return values (dasha house and solar-return JD). This is sufficient for the tool's simple purpose. Minor gap: no mention of possible additional outputs, but the core is covered.

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 coverage is 100% and includes descriptions for body properties. The description provides an example request body but does not add semantic detail beyond what the schema already describes. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool computes Lal Kitab annual progression at a given age and returns the running 35-year-cycle dasha house and approximate solar-return JD. The verb 'Returns' and the specific outputs distinguish it from other Lal Kitab tools.

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 implies usage for annual chart casting but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other vedic_lal_kitab tools or alternatives. No when-not or exclusions are provided.

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