search_tamil_verses

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds genuinely useful behavior: matching requires every search token to match (AND semantics) and results are ranked by relevance. It does not state pagination or result-size behavior beyond the schema's limit, but the crucial matching semantics are disclosed.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope, followed by return behavior, usage contexts, and the optional filter. Every sentence carries information and none is redundant.

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 no output schema, the description still covers what is returned (matching verses, relevance-ranked) and how the book filter narrows results. For a 3-param read-only search this is nearly complete; only an explicit note on default result volume/pagination is absent.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented. The description corroborates the query (Tamil text, quoted phrases allowed) and book filter ('Jhn', 'Psa') but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema's own examples.

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+resource with scope: search the Tamil Bible text (Tamil IRV, full 66 books) for words or phrases. It names what it is not by pointing to `word_study` and `search_by_strongs` for original-language follow-up, so an agent can route correctly among the ~22 siblings.

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 clear contexts — finding where the Tamil Bible uses a Tamil word, Tamil concordance work, and locating verses from remembered Tamil wording — plus an explicit hand-off to word_study/search_by_strongs. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' or 'use lookup_verse instead when you know the reference' exclusion.

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