Look up a Bible verse or passage by reference, such as John 3:16 or Psalm 23, to retrieve the requested scripture text.
Look up a Bible verse or passage by reference (e.g. 'John 3:16', 'Psalm 23').
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| reference | Yes | Bible reference, e.g. 'John 3:16', 'Romans 8:28-30' |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.11Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Look up' implies a read-only operation, but the description says nothing about behavior for invalid references, translation/version selection, or the nature of the returned content.
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?
A single, well-formed sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Nothing is extraneous.
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?
For a simple one-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description is minimal but functional. It omits what is returned (verse text, translation, verse-level detail) and any notes on handling invalid references, leaving modest gaps.
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%, so the single 'reference' parameter is fully documented in the schema with the same examples. The description adds no meaning beyond what the schema already supplies, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb ('Look up') and resource ('Bible verse or passage') with concrete reference examples. It is clear against generic siblings but does not explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby 'bible_random' tool.
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?
Usage is implied by 'by reference' - the agent can infer this is for known references rather than random retrieval. However there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of the bible_random alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.