vedika_human_design_chart

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and adds useful behavioral context: it states the cost ($0.040/call), explains the calculation basis (planetary positions and 88 degrees of the Sun before birth), and notes that exact birth time is critical. It does not explicitly state read-only/no-side-effect behavior, but the generate/calculate framing implies a computation tool.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then output contents, calculation method, and cost. It is reasonably efficient, though the sentence about Human Design synthesizing I Ching, Kabbalah, chakras, and quantum physics is educational rather than invocation-critical.

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, so the description must explain return values; it does so by listing Type, Strategy, Authority, Profile, Centers, Channels, and Gates. For a complex chart-generation tool it is fairly complete, though it does not describe response structure or error conditions in detail.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description reinforces the importance of precise birth time but adds little semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, making baseline 3 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 uses a specific verb+resource: "Generate a Human Design BodyGraph chart from birth details." It distinguishes this from sibling astrology tools like vedika_birth_chart by explicitly naming the Human Design BodyGraph domain and listing the resulting chart components.

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?

Usage is implied by the Human Design context and birth-detail requirements, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this versus vedika_birth_chart or other vedika chart tools. No alternatives or exclusions are named.

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