Get Upcoming Prayer and Countdown

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds a crucial behavioral obligation beyond those annotations: the agent must always disclose the calculation authority and the rationale for its selection, referencing authorityNotice in the response. This is actionable and materially changes how the agent should behave.

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 two sentences with no filler. The return values are front-loaded, and the mandatory disclosure follows in a clearly marked instruction. The all-caps note is justified because it is a critical agent obligation that must not be overlooked.

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?

With a full output schema, annotations covering safety, and a description that names the exact response fields (prayer name, time, authority method, countdown, authorityNotice), the agent has everything necessary to call and handle the tool correctly. The only minor gap, choosing among siblings, is a usage-guideline concern rather than a completeness gap.

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?

All six parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to repeat parameter-level details. It does mention 'calculation authority method', which maps to the calculationMethod parameter, but it adds no syntax, format, or default behavior beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states a specific verb and resource – returning the immediate next prayer with its name, scheduled time, authority method, and countdown. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_today_prayer_times by the 'immediate next' qualifier, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools.

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 usage when an agent needs the next upcoming prayer and its countdown, but it does not state when to prefer this tool over siblings like get_today_prayer_times or get_prayer_status, nor does it provide any exclusions. The mandatory disclosure note is an instruction for after invocation, not a selection guideline.

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