Compute Natal Chart

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 context on what is computed (positions, houses, aspects) and the ayanamsa applied. No contradiction with annotations; extra details enhance transparency.

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 yet comprehensive: a clear purpose sentence, followed by key features, a usage tip, and examples. Every sentence adds value with no fluff. The structure flows logically from what to how.

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 tool has 6 parameters (3 required), full schema coverage, and an output schema, the description covers all necessary context. The output is described as positions, houses, aspects, and ayanamsa. The description is complete for an AI agent to decide when and how to use this 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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for all 6 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining how to use the timezone parameter, showing examples of input, and clarifying the default values for house_system and zodiac. This goes beyond the schema but is not exhaustive – e.g., no description for latitude/longitude beyond schema.

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 it computes a complete natal chart and lists specific components (bodies, lunar nodes, Lilith, house cusps, Ascendant, Midheaven, aspects). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like compute_composite_chart by being specific to natal charts, making selection unambiguous.

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 provides explicit guidance on accepting local birth time with IANA timezone and supports tropical/sidereal zodiacs. It includes examples, but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool compared to siblings like compute_synastry or find_returns. Still, the typical use case is clear.

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