Varga D24 — Chaturvimsamsa

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds no additional behavioral traits beyond the educational context. It mentions cost but does not disclose any potential side effects or prerequisites.

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 explaining the chart's purpose, plus group label, cost, and a full example request. Every element earns its place with no redundancy or verbosity.

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?

For a straightforward chart calculation tool with no output schema, the description adequately informs the agent of the chart's purpose and required inputs. It lacks details on return format but is sufficient given the nature of the tool.

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%, so all 7 parameters are fully documented in the input schema. The description provides an example request body but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 is for 'Chaturvimsamsa / Siddhamsa chart' focused on 'education, learning, academic achievement'. This is specific and distinct from other Varga charts in the sibling list (e.g., vedic_varga_D10 for career, vedic_varga_D9 for marriage).

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 use for educational analysis but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other Varga charts or alternative approaches. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided, so the agent must infer context from the title.

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