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 context the annotations can't: that the output includes licensing and the exact identifier string to feed into other tools, which is the reason to call this first.

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, zero waste. The resource and payload are stated first, then the usage condition, so the most important routing information is front-loaded.

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 an output schema present and no input parameters, the description only needs to explain purpose and when to call it, both of which it does. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it correctly 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description nonetheless clarifies the meaning of a returned field (the name to pass as translation), which helps the agent wire this tool to its siblings.

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 ("List the Bible translations and Hebrew and Greek texts") plus the returned payload (name to pass as translation, license). That distinguishes it clearly from siblings like lookup, get_passage, or search_scripture, which consume a translation rather than enumerate them.

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?

Gives two concrete trigger conditions: the user asks which versions are available, or the user names a version the agent doesn't recognize. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or exclusion, but the when-to-use guidance is unambiguous.

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