get_passage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the core behavior (retrieving a verse or range) but does not disclose what happens on invalid input (e.g., nonexistent verse, invalid translation) or describe the output format. It is not misleading but lacks depth.

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 sentence of 17 words, front-loading the key information ('Get a single Bible verse or a range of verses'). Every word is meaningful, and there is no redundancy or extraneous detail.

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 5 parameters (4 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers the retrieval action. However, it could be more complete by specifying the return format (e.g., the verse text) to fully guide the agent. The lack of output schema shifts the burden to the description, which partially meets it.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'verse number(s)', hinting at the endVerse parameter for ranges. However, it does not explain the difference between verse and endVerse or the nature of the translation ID, which are already in 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'single Bible verse or a range of verses', specifying the method using book, chapter, and verse numbers. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_bibles, list_books, and get_chapter, which serve different purposes.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like get_chapter for whole chapters, or prerequisites like listing books or translations. The description implies usage by describing the action, but does not offer conditions or exclusions.

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