get_shabad_by_ang

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It communicates that the operation is a read ('Fetch') and defines the scope ('all lines') plus the valid Ang range. It does not mention error handling, ordering, or return format, but for a simple read-only tool, this is adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and resource immediately, followed by the range constraint. There is no unnecessary detail; every word 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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it defines the purpose, input scope, and implied output. It lacks explicit discussion of edge cases or alternatives, but the simplicity of the tool makes this acceptable.

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 covers the 'ang' parameter completely with its description 'Ang (page) number, 1–1430'. The description adds the meaning of fetching 'all lines' on that page, which slightly enriches the parameter context, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies.

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' and clearly identifies the resource: 'all lines on a given Ang (page number) of the SGGS'. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_line (single line) and get_shabad_by_line (fetch by line number), making the tool's scope unambiguous.

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 by stating that the tool fetches all lines for a page, and it constrains the input range (1–1430). However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives or state exclusions, so it lacks explicit when/when-not guidance but is still inferable.

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