역본 목록

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description indicates it is a read operation listing versions, but does not disclose additional traits like safety or performance. Since the tool has no parameters and is inherently simple, the basic behavior is transparent enough.

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, focused sentence that communicates the tool's purpose without any extraneous information. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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, parameterless tool, the description is largely adequate. It could benefit from mentioning the output format (e.g., returns a list of version names), but given the context and sibling tools, the current description is sufficient for an agent to understand its use.

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 input schema has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when no parameters exist, as the description adds no parameter info because none are needed.

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 tool provides a list of available Bible versions, including local ones, which is a specific verb+resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_books (which lists books within a version) and search, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the usage is implied: it is a straightforward listing tool with no parameters, so no complex guidance is needed. A score of 3 reflects the lack of explicit guidelines but adequate implicit clarity.

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