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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value by disclosing that results include tafsir passages from classical books and a link to the verse page, but says nothing about language, which tafsir editions, or how many passages are returned.

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?

A single dense sentence with the resource and the returned payload front-loaded; every clause (verse, tafsir passages, page link) carries information and there is no filler.

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?

For a two-required-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers purpose and the shape of the return value (tafsir + link) adequately. Remaining gaps — output language and tafsir source selection — are minor for this complexity level.

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 0%, so the schema gives only numeric bounds with no semantic labels; the description compensates partially by tying 'surah' and 'ayah' to the verse lookup. It does not clarify ayah numbering conventions, whether surah accepts a name, or what happens for out-of-range values beyond the schema maximum of 114.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieves a Qur'an verse by surah and ayah number, and additionally returns tafsir passages plus a page link. The resource (verse) is naturally distinct from siblings get_hadith and get_article, though the description never names those alternatives explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as get_hadith or search. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and parameters.

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