search_verse

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, so the tool's read-only nature is covered. The description adds 'semantic search' which hints at behavior, but does not disclose result behavior (e.g., empty results, ranking). No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it may be too brief for a search tool, lacking parameter context.

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 the tool has multiple parameters and siblings of various lookup types, the description is incomplete. It does not mention the translation option, limit behavior, or when to prefer this over other lookup tools. The presence of an output schema reduces the need for return value description, but parameter usage guidance 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no parameter information. The schema includes query (required), limit (default 5, max 20), and translation (enum of 4), but the description adds no meaning to these parameters.

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 'Find Bible verses by keyword or phrase using semantic search' clearly states the verb (find), resource (Bible verses), and method (keyword/phrase semantic search). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_verse (exact verse retrieval) and get_passage (passage by reference).

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 implies usage for keyword/phrase searching, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like get_verse or cross_reference. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided.

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