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

The description discloses that it returns 'every beyt plus prev/next ghazal numbers', giving insight into output structure. It also exemplifies with a famous opening line. However, it does not address edge cases like missing or conflicting parameters, but overall provides useful behavioral context.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words; the first states purpose and the second provides an illustrative example. The content is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The description is sufficient for a simple fetch tool: it covers identification, output contents, and gives a concrete example. With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to enumerate fields.

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?

Both parameters are described in the schema, and the description enriches them by specifying the number range (1..3230) and exact citation patterns ('G1393' / 'G1393:2'). The example further clarifies usage.

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 fetches 'ONE complete ghazal of the Divan-e Shams' by number or citation, distinguishing it from siblings like get_range or get_section. It also provides a concrete citation format and a famous example.

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 when you need a specific ghazal identified by its canonical number (1..3230) or a citation like 'G1393'. It doesn't explicitly compare with sibling tools, but the scoped purpose makes the use case clear.

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