fetch_scripture

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds the directive 'ALWAYS use format: "md" for best results', which is useful behavioral guidance, but it does not disclose return structure, rate limits, or potential side effects. Since this is a fetch operation, the lack of explicit read-only disclosure is mitigated but not fully addressed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every word earns its place. It is concise without sacrificing clarity.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description leaves out explanations of resource, testament, organization, and language. It does cover the main usage modes, but relies heavily on the schema for full context, making it minimally sufficient rather than complete.

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 75%, and the description adds meaningful context by explaining when to use reference versus search/filter, and strongly recommends format 'md'. This clarifies parameter relationships beyond the schema's individual field 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 states 'Fetch Bible scripture text' with a specific verb and resource, and clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling translation resources. It also differentiates the discovery modes (reference vs search/filter), making the scope unambiguous.

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 provides guidance on when to use reference versus search/filter, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool relative to siblings like search_biblical_resources. Usage is implied rather than explicitly contrasted with other tools.

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