get_bible_dictionary

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. Description adds that it returns the full dictionary article with cross-references, which is useful context beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Description is concise and well-structured: a short opening sentence, a bullet list of coverage areas, a 'USE THIS' section, and a return value statement. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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 single parameter and rich annotations, the description fully explains the tool's purpose, coverage, usage guidance, and return type. No output schema exists, but the description compensates by stating the return includes cross-references.

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 has 100% coverage with a clear description for 'topic'. Description provides example values (e.g., 'Abraham', 'covenant') but no additional semantic depth the schema lacks. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states verb+resource ('Look up a topic in the Tyndale Bible Dictionary') and enumerates specific categories of articles (people, places, concepts, etc.), distinguishing it from siblings like 'lookup_name' or 'word_study' that might have overlapping but different scopes.

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?

Provides explicit 'USE THIS when' scenarios (background info, historical context, detailed articles, scholarly definitions). While it does not mention when not to use or compare directly to siblings, the guidance is specific and actionable for an AI agent.

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