entities.paragraphsGet all paragraphs that mention a specific entity, ordered by position in the text. Useful for studying everything said about a particular being, place, or concept.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number (0-indexed) | |
| limit | No | Results per page (1-100) | |
| entity_id | Yes | Entity slug ID. Example: "god-the-father" |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | ||
| meta | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / audioRemoved value: -{}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / htmlTextRemoved value: -{
- "type": "string"
-}Output schema / properties / data / items / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "id",
- "standardReferenceId",
- "sortId",
- "paperId",
- "sectionId",
- "partId",
- "paperTitle",
- "sectionTitle",
- "paragraphId",
- "text",
- "htmlText",
- "labels",
- "audio"
-]New value: +[
+ "id",
+ "standardReferenceId",
+ "sortId",
+ "paperId",
+ "sectionId",
+ "partId",
+ "paperTitle",
+ "sectionTitle",
+ "paragraphId",
+ "text",
+ "labels"
+]Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / bibleParallelsAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "bookCode": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "chapter": {
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "chunkId": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "embeddingModel": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "rank": {
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "reference": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "similarity": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "source": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "text": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "verseEnd": {
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "verseStart": {
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "chunkId",
+ "reference",
+ "bookCode",
+ "chapter",
+ "verseStart",
+ "verseEnd",
+ "text",
+ "similarity",
+ "rank",
+ "source",
+ "embeddingModel"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / urantiaParallelsAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "embeddingModel": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "paperId": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "paperTitle": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "rank": {
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "sectionTitle": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "similarity": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "source": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "standardReferenceId": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "text": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "standardReferenceId",
+ "paperId",
+ "paperTitle",
+ "sectionTitle",
+ "text",
+ "similarity",
+ "rank",
+ "source",
+ "embeddingModel"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world). The description adds a real behavioral trait not in the annotations: results are 'ordered by position in the text,' which tells the agent how output is sequenced.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action before the use-case rationale. Both sentences carry weight, though the second is somewhat soft framing rather than essential 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?
With rich annotations, a fully documented schema, and an output schema, the description needn't explain return values. It covers purpose, ordering, and a use case; only explicit sibling routing is missing.
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% and all three parameters (entity_id, page, limit) are documented in the schema with defaults and bounds. The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
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 with scope: 'Get all paragraphs that mention a specific entity.' This distinguishes it from paragraphs.get (single paragraph) and entities.get (the entity itself). It does not, however, explicitly name a sibling to route against.
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?
'Useful for studying everything said about a particular being, place, or concept' gives a use case but no when-to-use/when-not guidance and no comparison to alternatives like search.fulltext or paragraphs.context. Usage is implied rather than directed.
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.