Get Bible Chapter

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds context by noting the return format (array of {number, text}) and 'Free Use Bible API', which are not in annotations. There is no contradiction.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. No wasted words. The structure is clean and immediately informative.

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 rich annotations and output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers the purpose, parameters via example, return format, and usage context. Minor gap: does not explain what happens if parameters are invalid (e.g., unknown book).

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 have descriptions in the input schema, so schema coverage is 100%. The description provides an example (e.g., KJV / John / 3), which adds a minor convenience but does not substantially enhance meaning 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 specifies the verb 'Fetch', the resource 'verse-by-verse text of a Bible chapter', and the required parameters (translation, book, chapter). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like bible.catalog.books or bible.catalog.translations by focusing on text retrieval.

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 implies usage for fetching chapter text but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., bible.catalog.books for book list, bible.catalog.translations for translation list). No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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