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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds output context (Asr times plus suhoor/iftar) but then fills the rest with irrelevant halal-checking claims that add no behavioral value for a prayer-times tool.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the description is then padded with a long block of unrelated halal-ruling content (food, cosmetics, medicines, schools, reasoning, alternatives) that does not earn its place and appears to be boilerplate from a sibling 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?

For a read-only, no-required-param tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies reasonable output context (Asr times, suhoor/iftar). But the contamination by off-topic copy and absence of any when-to-use guidance leaves it only minimally adequate.

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 the schema already documents lat, lon, city, date and method, including the enum values. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which is the baseline 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 opening sentence gives a concrete verb+resource: today's prayer times for a place, including Asr times and Ramadan suhoor/iftar. However, the remainder of the description abruptly pivots to generic 'is it halal?' copy about food, cosmetics, stocks and crypto, which describes a different tool and muddies what this one actually does.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as halalornot_ask_is_it_halal or halalornot_explain_schools, nor any mention of prerequisites for lat/lon vs city. Usage must be inferred entirely from the title.

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