islamhouse_item_tree

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the function (read operation) but does not explain the output structure, whether it's nested, or any side effects. No performance or error information is given.

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 description is a single concise sentence (8 words) that conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could benefit from slightly more context without becoming verbose.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should provide some indication of the return format (e.g., nested tree, fields). It does not, leaving the agent without sufficient context to understand what the tool produces. For a tool with two simple parameters, this is a notable gap.

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 coverage is 100%, with descriptions for both parameters ('Item ID' and 'Language code'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is 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 clearly states the action ('Get') and the resource ('categories tree hierarchy for a specific item'). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'islamhouse_categories_tree', which might also return a tree hierarchy but for all items. The specificity of 'for a specific item' helps, but lacks explicit distinction.

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 usage when needing a tree hierarchy for a particular item, but it provides no guidance on when to use it versus other tools like 'islamhouse_category_items' or 'islamhouse_categories_tree'. No exclusions or alternative mentions are present.

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