Skip to main content
Glama

Bible Get Verse

bible_get_verse
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get a specific Bible verse or range by reference (e.g., "john 3:16", "romans 8:28", "psalm 23:1-6"). Returns verse text in World English Bible translation.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "reference": "john 3:16"
    },
    "name": "bible_get_verse"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
referenceYesBible reference string (e.g. "john 3:16", "genesis 1:1-3", "psalm 23"). Spaces will be encoded automatically.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesFull verse text
versesYesArray of verse objects with book, chapter, verse, and text
referenceYesBible reference string
translationYesTranslation ID code
translation_nameYesFull name of the translation

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the full safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), so the bar is lower. The description adds one genuinely new fact beyond them — that text comes from the World English Bible — but says nothing about behavior on malformed or nonexistent references.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with purpose before the translation note, and no filler. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema that documents the return shape, this is close to sufficient. The remaining gap is sibling differentiation against get_passage and error behavior for invalid references.

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 description coverage is 100% and the schema already supplies reference examples and notes automatic space encoding, so the baseline is 3. The description's "or range" phrasing reinforces range support but adds no format or edge-case detail the schema lacks.

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 ("Get a specific Bible verse or range by reference") and names the translation returned. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling get_passage, so an agent cannot tell from this text alone which of the two to reach for.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase "specific Bible verse or range" plus reference examples signals single-reference lookups. There is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of the get_passage alternative.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.