nikoudVocalise un texte hébreu non ponctué via le nakdan de Dicta (dicta.org.il, outil académique). Genres : premodern (textes rabbiniques — défaut), modern, poetry. Renvoie la meilleure vocalisation et les variantes par mot ambigu.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| genre | No | Registre du texte (défaut premodern). | |
| texte | Yes | Texte hébreu sans nikoud (max ~2000 caractères). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, matching the description's read-only nature. The description adds behavioral transparency by disclosing the return format: the best vocalization and variants for ambiguous words. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them, though it does not cover error handling or rate limits.
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 compact and well-structured: the first sentence states the core function, and the second covers genres and return behavior. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or fluff.
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?
Given the tool's low complexity (2 parameters, 1 enum), full schema coverage, and read-only annotation, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, genre selection, and output. The return behavior is also mentioned, making the tool adequately understood without an output schema.
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%, so the baseline is 3. The description enhances parameter understanding by specifying that 'premodern' is the default and intended for rabbinic texts, while 'modern' and 'poetry' are other options. This adds practical guidance beyond the schema's enum descriptions.
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 a specific action: vocalizing unpointed Hebrew text via Dicta's nakdan. It identifies the resource ('texte hébreu non ponctué'), the method ('nakdan de Dicta'), and the genre options. This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which are unrelated to vocalization.
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 when to use the tool (for vocalizing Hebrew text) and provides genre-specific guidance (premodern for rabbinic texts, modern, poetry). It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references, but no sibling tool serves a comparable function, so the context is sufficient.
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 serves a clearly distinct purpose: skill loading, calendar, related links, full-text search, and text retrieval. There is no overlap in functionality, making selection unambiguous.
Four of five tools follow the 'sefaria_' prefix pattern, while 'hebrewbooks_skill' deviates slightly. The naming is still predictable and readable, with only minor inconsistency.
Five tools is well-scoped for a Torah study server, covering the essential operations without bloat. Each tool earns its place.
The set covers text retrieval, search, related texts, and daily study schedules, addressing the core domain. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct copy/export), but the workflow is functional.