Panchang — Rahu Kaal block

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, etc. The description adds that position depends on weekday and sunrise/sunset, which is useful. No contradictions, but the description does not exceed what annotations provide significantly.

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 short and to the point: 3 sentences plus example. It avoids redundancy, but could be slightly improved by briefly listing key optional parameters.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should describe the return format. It only mentions the names of the windows but not what the output contains (e.g., times, dates). Also, many parameters are unexplained, leaving gaps for a complex tool with 11 parameters.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It only provides an example with five parameters, but there are 11 total (e.g., houseSystem, zodiacType, ayanamsaId are unexplained). This is insufficient for an agent to understand all inputs.

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 calculates three inauspicious windows (Rahu Kaal, Yamaganda, Gulika) and the auspicious Abhijit Muhurat. This distinguishes it from other vedic_panchang sibling tools like full, choghadia, tithi, etc.

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 purpose is clearly about inauspicious times, but no explicit guidance on when to use this versus other panchang tools. Alternatives not mentioned, so the agent must infer selection from context.

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