Varga D7 — Saptamsa

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the behavioral context of 'children, progeny' but does not explain other traits like input constraints or output format. With annotations present, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 very short (one line plus cost/group metadata and an example). It is concise but lacks structure (e.g., sections for behavior, examples, return format). However, for a simple tool, it is efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Given the complexity of a varga chart and the absence of an output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what the chart contains (e.g., planetary positions, houses aspects), how to interpret the output, or any caveats. For a general-purpose agent, this is insufficient.

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% (all 7 parameters have descriptions). The description does not add any parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 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 'Saptamsa chart (children, progeny)' which identifies the tool's purpose and its specific focus. The title 'Varga D7 — Saptamsa' reinforces this. It distinguishes this varga from other varga tools like D1, D9, 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this D7 chart versus other varga charts (e.g., D1, D9, D10, etc.). With over 40 sibling varga tools, the agent needs explicit cues to select the correct one for children/progeny analysis.

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