papers.getGet a single paper with all its paragraphs. Paper IDs range from 0 (Foreword) to 196. Optionally include entity mentions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| paper_id | Yes | Paper ID (0-196). Example: '1' | |
| include_entities | No | Include entity mentions in each paragraph |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| paper | Yes | ||
| paragraphs | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds the ID range and optional entity mentions. However, these are largely restatements of schema properties rather than new behavioral traits like rate limits or error handling. No contradiction with annotations.
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 purpose. Everything included is relevant: the resource, the ID range, and the optional parameter. No filler or redundancy.
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 read tool with an output schema, full parameter coverage, and safe annotations, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns (a paper with all paragraphs), the valid ID range, and the optional include_entities flag. Sibling tools are distinguishable.
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 coverage is 100% and both parameters have clear descriptions. The description's mention of ID range and optional entity mentions mirrors the schema, adding no new meaning beyond what the structured 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Get a single paper with all its paragraphs." It clearly distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing "single paper" and all paragraphs, which contrasts with papers.list (list) and papers.sections (sections).
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 you need a specific paper, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over papers.list, papers.sections, or entities.get. The ID range provides operational context but no explicit comparison to alternatives.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action (e.g., audio.get vs bible.book vs entities.list). There is no overlap, and even similar tools like search.fulltext and search.semantic are clearly differentiated by mode.
All tools follow a consistent 'domain.action' pattern using lowercase and dots. Underscores within domain names (e.g., urantia_parallels) are uniform. No mixing of camelCase or irregular verbs.
19 tools is well-scoped for a server covering the Urantia Book and Bible integration. Each tool serves a distinct purpose without bloat or insufficiency.
The surface covers all core operations: browsing (list/get for papers, entities, paragraphs), searching (fulltext and semantic), structured navigation (toc.get, papers.sections), audio, and Bible parallels. No obvious gaps.