Ask a biblical or theological question and get a concise pastoral answer (250-400 words) grounded in Reformed theology with Scripture references. Best for practical faith questions, doctrine overviews, and life application.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| question | Yes | The biblical or theological question to answer |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adequately reveals output length (250-400 words), style (pastoral, Reformed theology), and inclusion of Scripture references, setting expectations for the response. It does not cover potential limitations or edge cases, but for a question-answering tool this is sufficient.
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, front-loaded with the primary action and key attributes, followed by usage guidance. Every word earns its place—no redundant or irrelevant information.
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?
Despite having no output schema and no annotations, the description provides sufficient context for a simple tool: purpose, response format, style, and usage scenarios. It could be more explicit about how it differs from sibling tools, but the 'Best for' phrase partially addresses this. The low complexity (one parameter) reduces the need for extensive detail.
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 fully documents the single parameter 'question' with a clear description. The tool description adds meaningful context by specifying the types of questions that are appropriate (practical faith, doctrine overviews, life application), which goes beyond the schema's generic 'biblical or theological question' phrasing.
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 the tool's purpose: asking a biblical or theological question and receiving a concise pastoral answer with specific characteristics (250-400 words, Reformed theology, Scripture references). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (e.g., scholar_query, search_sources) by focusing on pastoral and practical answers rather than scholarly or source-based responses.
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 on when to use the tool by specifying it is 'best for practical faith questions, doctrine overviews, and life application.' This implies when to use it, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or list exclusions, leaving a slight gap in guidance for choosing between this and sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly distinct: pastoral Q&A, daily devotion, daily exposition, and scholarly research. The only potential confusion is between scholar_query and search_sources, but the descriptions clearly separate 'detailed academic answers' from 'raw source passages.'
The majority follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (ask_question, get_daily_devotion, get_daily_exposition, search_sources). 'scholar_query' breaks the pattern slightly, making it the lone deviation.
Five tools is well-scoped for a biblical assistant, covering devotional, pastoral, and academic use cases without redundancy or bloat.
The tool surface covers all core needs: pastoral guidance, daily devotional content, daily Bible exposition, academic research, and raw source retrieval. No obvious gaps for the stated domain.
