Katzilla MCP

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

Annotations already cover read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world hints. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it discloses the source ('Al Quran Cloud'), update frequency ('updates daily'), and details about the return envelope structure ('Katzilla envelope { data, quality, citation }') with quality metrics and citation components.

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 efficiently structured in two sentences: the first states the purpose and key features, the second provides source and output details. Every sentence adds essential information with zero waste.

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 tool's moderate complexity, rich annotations, 100% schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, source, update behavior, and output structure, leaving technical details to the structured fields.

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 schema fully documents both parameters. The description mentions 'surah:ayah notation' and 'various editions/translations', which aligns with but doesn't add significant meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('retrieve Quran ayahs') and resources ('by reference with multiple translations'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying it's for Quran verses (unlike other culture tools like Bible API or poetry).

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 provides clear context for when to use it ('retrieve Quran ayahs by reference') and mentions the source ('Al Quran Cloud'), but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among siblings.

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