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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful content-level detail about the returned text variants, but it does not disclose behavioral details such as the default verse range when fromAyah/toAyah are omitted or error behavior for invalid surah slugs. No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single sentence with a front-loaded verb phrase and a colon that cleanly separates the operation from the payload details. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary elaboration.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries some responsibility for describing return contents, and it does name the three text forms. Minor gaps remain, such as unspecified metadata fields and default verse-range behavior, but these are not critical for a low-complexity retrieval tool with well-documented parameters.

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%, and the description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides for surah, fromAyah, and toAyah. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the full parameter documentation burden.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Return one surah's metadata and its verses,' and it enumerates the exact content included (Uthmani Arabic, simplified Arabic, Saheeh International translation). This differentiates it from siblings like list_surahs or search_quran, which serve different retrieval purposes.

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 usage for fetching a single surah's content, but it does not explicitly state when to use this instead of alternatives like list_surahs or search_quran. No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-naming guidance is given.

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