get_name_of_allah

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It explains how to invoke the tool but does not disclose behavior such as case sensitivity, exact matching, error handling for invalid numbers/transliterations, or response format. For a simple lookup, this is acceptable but not thorough.

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?

Single sentence with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is informative and necessary.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is concise but covers the essential input specification. It does not describe return values or error behavior, but for a straightforward lookup tool, it is reasonably complete. The presence of sibling tools for listing and searching further contextualizes its role.

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?

The input schema has a single string parameter 'identifier' with no description. The description adds crucial semantics: it can be a number (1–99) or a transliteration. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description compensates well, though it does not specify exact formatting rules (e.g., case, diacritics).

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'look up', the resource 'Name of Allah', and specifies the input methods: by number (1–99) or transliteration. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_asma_ul_husna (which likely lists all names) and search_asma_ul_husna (which might allow broader search).

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 implicitly guides usage by specifying acceptable input formats (number or transliteration). It does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the context with sibling tools makes the use case clear.

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