quran_ayah

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint, fully covering the safety/behavior profile, so the description's burden is light. It adds nothing beyond that – no note on edition fallback behavior, missing-ayah handling, or external API dependence despite openWorldHint=true.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste; the resource and its scoping are stated before the illustrative example. Nothing extraneous.

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 single-verse lookup with an output schema present (so return shape need not be described) and 100% schema coverage, the description is largely sufficient. It is only slightly thin on distinguishing itself from the neighboring Quran tools.

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 both the reference format ("surah:ayah" or absolute number) and the edition slug with default are already documented in the schema. The description's example duplicates the schema's own example, adding no new parameter meaning. Baseline 3 is correct.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get a single ayah") and scopes it to a single verse by reference, which implicitly distinguishes it from quran_surah/quran_juz/quran_search. The inline example clarifies intent, but no sibling is named explicitly, so differentiation still requires inference.

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?

Usage is implied by "a single ayah by reference" – the agent can infer this is for looking up one specific verse rather than a range or text search. However, it never states when to prefer quran_surah, quran_juz, or quran_search instead, nor any preconditions.

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