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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that reading continues across chapters and proceeds a passage at a time, which is modest behavioral value, but it says nothing about what a call returns or how to know when the book ends.

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?

It is short and the continuation hint is front-loaded, but the trailing inventory 'daily shabad, plans, search, Ang and shabad lookup' is keyword padding that describes sibling tools rather than this one, diluting an otherwise compact definition.

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 ideally say what a passage call returns and how the agent advances through a book, but it only vaguely gestures at 'follow next.' Everything needed to make a valid call is in the schema, so the definition is minimally adequate rather than complete.

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%, so book, section, n, and ref are all documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, format, or precedence detail beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 names the resource (Gurbani) and an action (scroll/read a passage at a time), and the title's 'follow next' hints at sequential reading. However, 'Scroll the Gurbani' largely restates the tool name and title, and it never distinguishes this from siblings like gurbani_get_reading, gurbani_get_shabad, 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?

The only guidance is 'Follow next for the next passage; it carries on into the next chapter,' which describes continuation behavior but not when to choose this tool over gurbani_get_reading or gurbani_get_shabad. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative-routing are given.

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