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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so no credit is due for repeating a safe-read posturing. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the title, such as ordering, coverage of the library, or pagination.

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?

'read a passage at a time' is stated twice and the sentence about daily verses, plans, search and verse lookup is unrelated padding. The remaining content is title-level rather than information a calling agent can act on.

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 zero-parameter enumeration tool with no output schema, the description should at least convey what a caller receives (e.g., book identifiers/titles to feed into gita_read_book). It supplies none of that and instead repeats marketing copy, leaving the calling contract underspecified.

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 tool takes zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to clarify at the parameter level; baseline 4 applies.

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 largely restates the title ('Gita Scroller. The whole books in the Library that can be read a passage at a time') and never states a clear verb like 'list' or says what the list contains. It also lumps in unrelated feature copy ('daily verses, plans, search and verse lookup') that belongs to sibling tools, muddying the purpose rather than sharpening it.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no alternative is named, even though siblings like gita_search_readings, gita_get_verse, and gita_read_book clearly cover the other functions the description mentions. The agent is left to infer that this tool only enumerates available books.

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