get_qaloun_passage

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety and idempotency are covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by stating that content is 'unchanged' and comes from 'checksum-pinned source files', which discloses provenance and integrity guarantees beyond the annotations.

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 with no filler or redundant restatement. Every phrase contributes either the verb, the resource, or the integrity scope.

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?

The tool requires a nested reference object with corpus identifiers, numbering system, riwaya, tariq, surah, ayah, and end_ayah, but the description does not explain how to supply or interpret these fields. The output schema reduces the need to describe return values and annotations cover safety, but the input guidance remains inadequate for this complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It only vaguely implies ayat and page spans and gives no meaning for the nested selection fields such as start, end_ayah, corpus_id, corpus_version, numbering_system, riwaya, tariq, surah, or ayah.

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 a specific verb, 'Read', and names a specific resource, 'Qaloun ayat and verified page spans', plus its source, 'checksum-pinned source files'. It does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings such as get_source_page or analyze_qaloun_tajwid, but the purpose itself is clear.

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 no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives like get_source_page, search_source_pages, or analyze_qaloun_tajwid, so an agent must infer when this passage-specific reader is appropriate.

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