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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description contributes one useful trait beyond that: the output is "for voice" and delivered "one line at a time," implying a TTS-friendly, incremental card. It says nothing about return shape or paging beyond that phrase.

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 tool purpose is buried in a sentence that repeats the title nearly verbatim, followed by a generic catalog of unrelated Gurbani features and a stray double period. The second sentence is noise for an agent trying to decide whether to call this tool.

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 should clarify what a 'card' contains, and it only gestures at that ('one line at a time, for voice'). Params and safety are fully covered by schema and annotations, so this is minimally adequate but leaves the core deliverable 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with clear docs for n, date, and reading, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema (e.g., how 'reading' ids map to cards), so the baseline 3 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 says it returns "Today's reading one line at a time," which hints at the resource granularity, but "Scroll the Gurbani" is vague and the second sentence just enumerates the whole Gurbani toolset rather than this tool. It does not distinguish gurbani_get_card from gurbani_get_today, gurbani_get_reading, or gurbani_get_ang.

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 indication of when to choose this card tool over gurbani_get_today or gurbani_get_reading, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The closing list of capabilities ("daily shabad, plans, search, Ang and shabad lookup...") describes other tools, not this one's usage conditions.

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