get_line

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read operation ('Fetch') but does not disclose what the response contains (e.g., line text, metadata), error behavior for invalid IDs, or any other side effects. This is a moderate gap given the simplicity of the tool.

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 with no redundancy. It front-loads the action ('Fetch a specific line') and packs essential context (the ID source) without wasted words.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it explains what it does and where the ID comes from. However, it doesn't specify the return format, which could be inferred but is not explicit. Given the low complexity, this is adequate but not perfect.

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 schema already provides a description for line_id, giving 100% coverage. The description adds value by clarifying that the ID is 'as returned by search_gurbani', establishing provenance and expected format beyond the schema's 'BaniDB verse ID (e.g. 3)'.

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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' with a clear resource ('a specific line from the SGGS') and identifies the unique identifier ('BaniDB verse ID'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_shabad_by_ang or get_shabad_by_line. It also references search_gurbani as the source of the ID, adding precision.

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 the tool should be used when you have a verse ID returned by search_gurbani, providing clear context for its use. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives (e.g., fetch by Ang or line number), so it stops short of full exclusionary guidance.

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