get_fatwa

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it discloses local caching after first read and the existence of a refresh parameter to bypass cache. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the caching/refresh detail is placed logically after. Every sentence earns its place.

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 annotations covering safety and an output schema present (stated in context), the description covers the essential usage details: what it fetches, the source URL, and caching behavior. An agent can call it correctly without additional information.

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 both url and refresh already well-described in the schema. The description adds the note 'as returned by search_fatwas' for url and mentions caching for refresh, but both are also implied in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the description adds minimal extra meaning.

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 tool fetches one full fatwa by URL and enumerates the specific content (question, answer, citations, issuing darul ifta, link). This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_fatwas (search) and browse_fatwas (browse).

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 notes the URL comes from search_fatwas, which implies its usage context, and mentions caching behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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