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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety burden is covered. The description adds useful behavioral scope: it covers a specified week, includes Yom Tov, and returns parsha/holiday readings. It does not contradict annotations and gives a solid picture of result contents.

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?

A single dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads the two main output types and then adds the important boundaries: coming or specified, Yom Tov, readings, and location.

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?

Given the 100%-covered schema, the read-only annotations, and the description's clear output summary, an agent can correctly select and invoke this tool. The main gap is the lack of any pointer to related tools for other calendar or reading needs, but the description is otherwise 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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add much parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, such as the date default, location alternatives, and candle/havdalah minute adjustments.

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 states exactly what the tool returns: candle-lighting and havdalah times for Shabbat and Yom Tov, plus parsha and holiday Torah readings, for a location. It is specific enough to distinguish this from siblings like get_zmanim or get_torah_reading, which cover only part of this scope.

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 when to use the tool—when Shabbat/Yom Tov times and Torah readings are needed together—but gives no explicit guidance about alternatives or exclusions. It does not name siblings such as get_zmanim or get_parasha, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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