Varga D2 — Hora

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds no behavioral details beyond stating it's a Hora chart and providing an example request. It does not describe response format, error behavior, or any side effects.

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 (one line for chart type, one line for example, plus metadata). It is front-loaded with purpose. However, the inclusion of [Group: Vedic] and [Cost: 20 credits] adds minor noise and could be omitted or placed elsewhere.

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 does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., chart data, HTML, JSON). For a 7-parameter tool with no output schema, this is a significant gap. The example request is helpful but incomplete without response description.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any new meaning to parameters beyond what schema already provides; the example request illustrates usage but doesn't clarify parameter semantics.

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 title 'Varga D2 — Hora' and description 'Hora chart (wealth analysis, half-sign Sun/Moon division)' clearly state the tool computes the D2 divisional chart for wealth analysis. This distinguishes it from other vedic_varga_* siblings by specifying chart type and purpose.

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 'wealth analysis' implying use for wealth-related queries, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use D2 versus other divisional charts (e.g., D1, D9). No exclusion criteria or alternative suggestions are provided.

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