Retrieve historical, philosophical, and textual basis metadata for a Bible translation or the entire catalog. Use it to understand what distinguishes each translation.
Retrieves historical, philosophical, and textual basis metadata for Bible translations (or 'all' for complete catalog).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| translation_id | No | Translation ID (e.g. 'UBIO', 'UKRK', 'KJV', 'all') |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly implies a read-only retrieval operation and reveals the special 'all' catalog behavior, which is useful. However, it does not describe return shape, pagination, error behavior for unknown translation IDs, or any other operational details.
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 well-structured sentence that places the core purpose first and appends the 'all' behavior in parentheticals. There is no redundancy or wasted wording.
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?
The tool has one optional parameter and no output schema, and the description gives a reasonable overview of the returned metadata. However, without annotations or output details, the description stops short of fully preparing the agent for the response structure or edge cases. It is adequate for basic invocation but not fully 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?
The schema already fully documents the single parameter with examples ('UBIO', 'UKRK', 'KJV', 'all'), and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to repeat parameter meaning, but it also does not add any additional semantic insight beyond what the schema provides.
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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieves'), names an exact resource ('historical, philosophical, and textual basis metadata for Bible translations'), and adds the special 'all' behavior for a complete catalog. This gives the agent a clear understanding of what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_verse or compare_translations_diff.
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 explains what the tool does but does not state when to use it versus alternatives. It provides no explicit conditions, exclusions, or references to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer when translation metadata is needed instead of verse content, commentary, or cross-references.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.