Urantia Papers

Urantia Parallels of a Work

works.urantia_parallels

Read-onlyIdempotent

The 10 Urantia paragraphs closest in meaning to one unit of a work (the chunk that holds it). Semantic parallels, not curated ones: they do not claim that two teachings are the same. The reference must name one unit.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ref`	Yes	A unit, a short range, or a chapter: "John 3:16", "2.47", "Dhp 183", "John 3".
`work`	Yes	"bible", or a work id from works.list, such as "bhagavad-gita".

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 25, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / work / properties / catalogTranslation

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "license": {
+      "const": "CC0-1.0",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "method": {
+      "const": "machine",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "review": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "method",
+    "license",
+    "review"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / work / properties / textLanguage
```
Added value: +{
+  "const": "eng",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

changedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / work / required

Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "title",
-  "tradition"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "title",
+  "tradition",
+  "textLanguage"
+]

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 19, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / work / properties / tradition
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / work / required
```
Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "title"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "title",
+  "tradition"
+]
```
AddedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: exactly 10 results, ranked by semantic closeness, and that these are computed similarities rather than curated equivalences. It stops short of describing ordering/scoring output or whether results can be empty.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned and how many. The middle caveat earns its place; the trailing 'The reference must name one unit' is slightly redundant with the schema's examples but is short enough not to be waste.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. For a fixed-size, two-parameter read tool the description is nearly sufficient; the one gap is the missing sibling differentiation against bible.verse.urantia_parallels, which an agent choosing between them would want.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters carry examples ('John 3:16', 'bhagavad-gita'), so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description adds only the constraint that the reference must name one unit, which slightly narrows the schema's stated allowance of 'a short range, or a chapter'. Baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb-and-resource: the 10 Urantia paragraphs semantically closest to one unit of a named work. The parenthetical '(the chunk that holds it)' clarifies what a unit is. It does not name the near-identical sibling bible.verse.urantia_parallels or explain how it differs, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The line 'Semantic parallels, not curated ones: they do not claim that two teachings are the same' sets expectations for interpreting results, and 'The reference must name one unit' is a usage constraint. But there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, and no pointer to bible.verse.urantia_parallels (which presumably serves the same role for Bible verses) or works.search.semantic as alternatives.

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

All Urantia Papers tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.