Search the Bible by keyword or phrase across both Old and New Testaments. Retrieve matching verses instantly with configurable translation and limit.
Perform accurate full-text search (FTS5) across Old & New Testaments.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max verses (default 10) | |
| keyword | Yes | Keyword or phrase to search | |
| translation | No | Translation code |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the exact-text FTS5 behavior and OT/NT scope, which is useful, but remains silent on default translation, ranking, case/accent handling, and result shape.
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?
One sentence with no filler, and the core mechanism and scope are front-loaded. Every word earns its place.
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 sits among many search-related siblings and has no output schema, yet the description gives no usage differentiation and no return-format notes. The schema covers parameters, but the operational context is incomplete for an agent choosing among similar tools.
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?
All three parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds only the context that the search spans the Old and New Testaments, not parameter-level detail beyond the schema.
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 ('search') and resource ('Old & New Testaments'), and the FTS5 qualifier makes it distinct from sibling semantic/topic search tools even without naming them. The operation and scope are immediately clear.
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 sentence indicates when to choose this tool over search_semantic, search_topic, or search_scripture_hybrid, and no exclusions are given. The only usage signal is the implicit keyword-vs-semantic distinction, which an agent must infer.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.