Skip to main content
Glama

Bibelstudium MCP

by de.bibelstudium-mcp

bible_search

Read-only

Full-text search over the German Bible text. Finds verses containing ALL given words (exact word forms; umlauts/accents are folded, so 'fuhrt' matches "führt"). Quote phrases ("Gnade um Gnade"); a trailing * makes a prefix search (lieb* finds liebe/lieben/liebet …). Use this to locate a passage when the wording is known but the reference is not. Optionally restrict to one book.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bookNoOptional: restrict to one book (German name, e.g. "Psalmen", "Röm")
limitNoMaximum verses to return (default 10, max 50); the total count is always exact
queryYesWords or "phrases" to search for, e.g. 'Hirte mangeln' or '"Gnade um Gnade"'
translationNoTranslation to search: "LUT" (Luther 1912), "SCH" (Schlachter 1951), "ELB" (Elberfelder 1871), "MB" (Menge 1939), "SLT" (Schlachter 2000). Default: "SLT" (Schlachter 2000). Aliases like "luther", "schlachter" accepted. Only editions this instance actually loaded can be requested; bible_server_info lists them.SLT

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sucheYes
verseYes
hinweisYes
quellenYes
trefferYesNumber of matching VERSES, not of word occurrences: a verse can match several times.
gekuerztNo
verteilungNoCounted over all hits, not over the listed verses. Carries `buch` for a whole-Bible search and `kapitel` when restricted to one book. Take these numbers; do not derive them from the result list.
uebersetzungYes
vorkommen_gesamtNoNumber of word occurrences across all matching verses. Absent when the occurrences were not counted (see `hinweis`); do not estimate it in that case.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses rich behavioral traits beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: exact word matching, umlaut/accent folding ('fuhrt' matches 'führt'), phrase search, trailing-star prefix search, and optional book restriction. This gives the agent a thorough understanding of how the search behaves.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four sentences, each earning its place: purpose, syntax rules, use-case, and scope restriction. Information is front-loaded and free of redundancy. The structure flows naturally from what the tool does to how to use it.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (full-text search with syntax and translation options), the description covers key aspects: search semantics, use case, and book restriction. Output schema covers return values. A minor gap is the lack of mention of limit behavior or exclusions for sibling tools, but the description is largely complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, giving the baseline 3. The description adds significant meaning: query syntax examples (e.g., 'Hirte mangeln', '"Gnade um Gnade"'), wildcard semantics, and translation edition details including aliases and instance availability. This enriches parameter understanding beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with 'Full-text search over the German Bible text', a specific verb and resource that clearly defines the tool's function. It further details search features (exact word forms, phrases, prefix wildcard) which distinguishes it from sibling tools like bible_lookup or bible_compare.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Use this to locate a passage when the wording is known but the reference is not.' This states the intended scenario clearly, but it does not mention alternative tools or exclusions, so it falls short of a full comparison with siblings.

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

All Bibelstudium MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The tools are mostly distinct: bible_lookup retrieves text by reference, bible_search finds by words, bible_original gives original-language detail, bible_compare compares Greek editions, bible_concordance does word studies, bible_crossrefs provides cross-references, and bible_server_info reports server data. There is slight potential for confusion between bible_original and bible_compare since both deal with original languages, but their purposes are clearly delineated.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent 'bible_' prefix followed by a single descriptive verb (lookup, search, original, compare, concordance, crossrefs, server_info). The pattern is uniform and predictable, making it easy to infer tool purpose from the name alone.

Tool Count5/5

Seven tools is well-scoped for a Bible study server. Each tool covers a core function (looking up, searching, original text, comparison, concordance, cross-references, and server info) without redundancy, and the count is in the ideal range for maintainability and clarity.

Completeness4/5

The tool set appears comprehensive for typical Bible study needs: retrieval, search, original-language analysis, textual comparison, concordance, cross-references, and server metadata. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct tool for retrieving full chapter text or parallel reading across translations (though bible_lookup can retrieve multiple verses), and no support for OT textual comparison since only one edition exists; these are acceptable limitations.

Resources