get_name_of_allah

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains the two accepted input formats but omits details such as return value, error handling, case sensitivity, or whether it returns a single result. This minimal disclosure leaves significant behavioral uncertainty.

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, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with the action and fully specifies the input modes. No unnecessary words are present.

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?

While the tool is simple, the description lacks any mention of return value or behavior, and it does not contextualize the tool against the many similar sibling tools. For a lookup tool with no output schema, this is a clear gap, though the core action is clear.

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 only defines 'identifier' as a string with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description compensates by explaining that the identifier can be a number (1–99) or a transliteration like 'Ar-Rahman', providing clear semantic understanding for the single parameter.

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's function: looking up a specific Name of Allah by numeric (1–99) or transliteration identifier. It uses a specific verb ('look up') and defines the resource and accepted identifiers, effectively distinguishing it from sibling search tools.

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 the caller has a specific number or transliteration, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives like search_asma_ul_husna or get_asma_ul_husna. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving guidance implicit.

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