theological_analysis

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

The description does not add behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not explain what happens if the reference is invalid, or how related passages are determined.

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 short sentence, which is concise but at the expense of completeness. It does not fully earn its place as it lacks critical details.

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 complexity of theological analysis, the description is too minimal. Even with an output schema present, the description should clarify the nature of the assembled passages and the analysis performed.

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 low (only translation has a description). The description does not mention any parameters, leaving the agent to infer meaning from property names without format or constraint details.

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 it assembles passages and a question for theological analysis, which gives a general idea. However, 'assemble' is ambiguous and does not clearly distinguish from sibling tools like 'summarize_passage' or 'cross_reference' that also deal with passages.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With nine sibling tools covering similar functionality, the lack of usage instructions is a significant gap.

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