Panchang — full

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds cost (50 credits) and group (Vedic) but does not contradict annotations. It adds minimal behavioral 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?

Description is concise, front-loaded with key outputs, and includes an example. The extra lines for group and cost are useful but somewhat meta. Could be slightly tighter but overall well-structured.

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, no output schema, and complex Vedic context, the description should explain input parameters and return format. It fails to describe what the response contains (e.g., types, structure). Incomplete for an AI agent to know what to expect.

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 0% with 11 parameters. Description provides only a single example body (date, time, timezoneOffset, latitude, longitude) without explaining any parameter semantics. Missing explanation for 9 parameters including houseSystem, zodiacType, ayanamsaId, etc. Insufficient for correct usage.

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?

Description explicitly lists all components returned (Tithi, Vara, etc.) and positions itself as the comprehensive single-call alternative to individual panchang tools. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like vedic_panchang_choghadia or vedic_panchang_rahu_kaal.

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?

States this is a 'single call' for complete panchang and provides an example request. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus individual panchang tools, leaving it implicit that this is the full version.

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