lookup_verse

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description isn't burdened with safety disclosure. It adds valuable behavioral context: returns each verse on its own line, tags verses with 'Book Chapter:Verse (TRANSLATION)', supports side-by-side translation comparison, and mentions the default translation (KJV). 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 four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage, output format, and alternative guidance. Every sentence earns its place; no fluff or repetition.

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 an output schema for return values, so the description needn't explain them. It covers accepted input forms, translation behavior, default, output formatting, and when to use alternatives. For a 2-parameter lookup tool with rich annotations and output schema, this is 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%: both 'reference' and 'translations' have detailed schema descriptions. The description adds examples ('John 3:16', 'Genesis 1:1-5', ['KJV','WEB']) and reinforces the default, but doesn't introduce meaning beyond the schema. 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch the exact text of a Bible verse, verse range, verse list, or whole chapter.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings by stating it is for when you already have a reference, unlike search_keyword or search_by_meaning.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this whenever you already have a reference' and 'If you don't have a reference, use search_keyword ... or search_by_meaning.' This directly tells the agent when to use this tool versus named alternatives.

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