get_muhurta

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool calculates time slots based on a date and location, but it does not mention if it requires internet, if it has rate limits, or if it is read-only. The description adds value by explaining the planetary rulers and qualities, but behavioral traits like data dependence or side effects are not covered.

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 with 2 sentences and 31 words. It front-loads the key information (what it is) and then provides additional usage context. There is no wasted text.

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 no output schema, the description effectively describes the return: 'all time slots with planet ruler and quality.' The tool is moderately complex (5 parameters, no enums), and the description covers the functional essence. It could mention that the returned data includes day and night periods, but that is implied by 'divided into day and night periods.'

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% with all 5 parameters described individually. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that the tool calculates muhurta for the given date and location, which ties the parameters together. However, it does not provide additional details about the meaning of 'tz' or 'lat/lon' beyond what the schema already has.

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 what the tool does: 'Get Choghadiya muhurta — the auspicious and inauspicious time slots for a day...' It specifies the resource (Choghadiya muhurta) and provides context about auspiciousness for activities. It distinguishes from other astrology tools like 'get_panchang' or 'check_kaalsarp_dosha' by focusing on daily time slots rather than planetary periods or doshas.

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 partially says when to use: for starting new ventures, contracts, travel. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or provide alternatives among siblings. The usage context is implied but not comprehensive.

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