Exegetical Notes

Exegetical Notes

Purpose

Produce structured, context-neutral exegetical analysis of a biblical passage. Data-grounded. Always English. Output to file (default) or inline (--output print).

Key constraint: Every data claim must come from bundled data or web-verified scholarly sources. Training knowledge supplements but never substitutes for data.

Iron Rules

Rule 1: Run Pericope Check First — Warning BEFORE Notes

Before generating notes, run a lightweight boundary check:

1. Identify passage boundaries
2. Check Levinsohn (NT) or Masoretic (OT) for boundary confirmation
3. If boundaries are problematic: Print the warning BEFORE the notes header. The warning is a standalone block that appears BEFORE # Exegetical Notes:. Do not embed it inside Section 1. Do not skip it.
4. If user confirms problematic passage: Proceed with note in Pericope Status

Warning format (print this BEFORE the notes):

⚠️ Boundary check: [Book] [Range] may be a partial unit.
[Specific issue with discourse evidence]
Recommended passage: [better range]

Proceeding with [original range] — boundary issue noted in Pericope Status.

Correct output order for problematic boundaries:

1. First: ⚠️ Boundary check warning (standalone)
2. Then: # Exegetical Notes: [Book] [Range] header and all 10 sections

Wrong: Embedding the boundary warning inside Section 1 without a standalone warning first.

Rule 2: Lexical Analysis Uses query_morphology MCP Tool

Section 4 (Lexical Analysis) must:

• Use morphology data from data-retriever's MORPHOLOGY_SUMMARY (or direct query_morphology fallback)
• Cite actual counts from data-retriever's VOCABULARY_SUMMARY (or direct query_vocabulary fallback)
• Cite per-occurrence verse references from data-retriever's VERSE_REFERENCES (or direct query_morphology with word_filter fallback)
• Never say "appears frequently" — give exact count AND verse references
• Format: lemma (reference): morph description [query_morphology]

Valid: ἐναρξάμενος (1:6): lemma ἐνάρχομαι, aorist middle participle, nom. sg. masc. [query_morphology] Invalid: ἐναρξάμενος is an aorist participle meaning "having begun"

Rule 3: Tier All Interpretive Claims

Section 6 must use exactly four tiers, each labeled:

• Tier 1: Linguistic Evidence — morphology/grammar directly contradicts the misreading
• Tier 2: Discourse Evidence — Levinsohn features or structure contradicts
• Tier 3: Scholarly Consensus — web-search-verified with real citations
• Tier 4: Agent Assessment — the heading MUST read "Tier 4: Agent Assessment" (not "Interpretive Notes" or any other label). This distinguishes agent-derived opinion from established scholarly consensus.

Never mix tiers. If no Tier 3 source found after web search, state this explicitly.

Rule 4: Tier 3 Source Quality

For web searches (Tier 3 guardrails):

Prefer (Tier A): NICNT, NIGTC, ICC, WBC, BECNT, Hermeneia, BNTC, AB, BDAG Accept (Tier B): Study Bibles with scholarly notes, TDNT, ABD, NAC Use with caution (Tier C — always cite tier): Popular commentaries (BST, TNTC), credentialed scholar blogs Reject (Tier D): Devotional websites, AI content, uncredited blogs, forums

Citation format (mandatory for all Tier 3 claims):

Wrong: "Author argues that [claim]." Correct: "Author (Title, Series, Year, p. N) argues that [claim]. [Tier A/B/C]"

Every Tier 3 citation MUST include: Author + (Title, Series, Year). Page numbers when available. An author name alone is not a citation — it is a name-drop. The tier label (A/B/C) must follow every citation.

If only Tier C sources found, state: "[Tier C source, use with caution]"

Training-knowledge fallback: If web search yields no usable source, cite a well-known commentary from training knowledge using the standard citation format and mark it "[training knowledge — verify before publication]". For major NT/OT passages, the agent knows standard commentaries (e.g., O'Brien on Philippians, NIGTC; Fee, NICNT; Moo on Romans, NICNT). A training-knowledge citation with a verification caveat is always preferable to "No Tier A/B source located" with no named source at all.

If genuinely no source is known (rare for canonical passages), state: "No Tier A/B source located for this claim."

Rule 5: Cross-Check Data Claims Before Delivering

After generating the full notes, pick up to 5 data claims to cross-check, prioritized by risk:

1. At least 1 morphological parsing (voice or mood — highest error risk)
2. At least 1 frequency count (verify exact number and verse references)
3. Any hapax legomena claim (if the notes assert a word appears only once)
4. Remaining slots: highest-consequence claims for the interpretation

For each selected claim, re-query the relevant MCP tool to confirm the cited value matches. Report cross-check results in Section 10. If any mismatches: correct the claim before delivering.

Do NOT cross-check every data claim — this consumes tool-call budget needed for the full output. 5 risk-prioritized checks catch the most consequential errors.

Rule 6: Exactly 10 Sections, Exactly These Names

The output format has exactly 10 sections. Use exactly these section titles:

1. Passage in Literary Context
2. Internal Structure
3. Propositional Summary
4. Lexical Analysis
5. Exegetical Conclusions
6. Interpretive Guardrails
7. Open Questions
8. Intertextual Links
9. Data Sources
10. Verification

Do not rename sections. Do not substitute "Homiletical Trajectories" for "Interpretive Guardrails." Do not substitute "Theological Themes" for "Exegetical Conclusions." Do not substitute "Discourse Structure" for "Internal Structure." Do not omit sections. Do not add sections. Do not reorder sections.

Do not abbreviate the output even if the user asks for "brief" or "essentials." All 10 sections are required for every invocation. The Verification section (Section 10) is never optional.

Rule 7: Deliver Output

File mode (default, or --output file): Save to:

~/.claude/exegetical-notes/{book_name}/{YYYY-MM-DD}-{chapter-verse-to-chapter-verse}.md

Examples:

• ~/.claude/exegetical-notes/philippians/2026-02-18-1-1-11.md
• ~/.claude/exegetical-notes/genesis/2026-02-18-37-2-11.md

After saving, report the saved path to user.

Print mode (--output print): Output the complete notes inline in your response. Do not save to file. Do not summarize. Print ALL 10 sections in full, directly in the response. The user sees only what you print — if you save to file instead, the user gets nothing useful.

Never ignore --output print. If the invocation says --output print, you MUST print inline. Do not save to a file and return a summary. Do not "display" a summary of what you generated. Print the full document.

Sub-Agent Delegation

This skill delegates MCP data gathering to the data-retriever agent (Haiku) for cost-efficient bulk data retrieval. The skill retains scholarly interpretation, section composition, and cross-checking.

Delegation chain:

exegetical-notes (skill, user's model)
  └─→ data-retriever (Haiku) — MCP tool calls + compression

How to spawn:

Task tool:
  subagent_type: "claude-of-alexandria:data-retriever"
  prompt: "Gather all relevant data for [Book] [Range].
           Also call query_morphology with pos_filter: 'conjunction'"

Include the pos_filter request for NT epistles. Omit it for OT and non-epistolary books.

Parsing data-retriever output:

• MORPHOLOGY_SUMMARY: → data for Section 4 (Lexical Analysis)
• CONJUNCTION_MORPHOLOGY: → data for Section 2 (Internal Structure, epistle connectives)
• DISCOURSE_SUMMARY: → data for Sections 1-2 (context, structure) and pericope check
• PARAGRAPH_MARKERS: → OT boundary data for pericope check and Section 2
• VOCABULARY_SUMMARY: → data for Section 4 (frequencies, semantic groups)
• VERSE_REFERENCES: → data for Section 4 (per-occurrence verse locations for top lemmas)
• OT_QUOTES_SUMMARY: → data for Section 8 (Intertextual Links)
• LEMMA_DISTRIBUTION: → data for Section 8 (cross-book connections)
• THEME_MATCHES: → data for Sections 5, 7 (theological themes)
• TOOL_RESULTS: → data for Section 9 (Data Sources)

Fallback: If data-retriever spawn fails, fall back to direct MCP tool calls. Note the fallback in Section 9 (Data Sources).

Direct MCP calls retained for:

• Cross-check verification (Step 6) — must verify claims against fresh MCP data
• Supplementary queries discovered during section composition

Workflow

Step 1: Parse invocation → book, range, --output, --context

Step 2: GATHER DATA via data-retriever agent
   → Spawn data-retriever via Task tool (see Sub-Agent Delegation)
   → For NT epistles: include pos_filter: "conjunction" in the prompt
   → Parse compressed output into working data for all sections
   → If data-retriever fails: fall back to direct MCP tool calls

   Logical connectives for Section 2 (epistles):
   γάρ=grounds, οὖν=inference, δέ=contrast/continuation, ἀλλά=strong contrast,
   ἵνα=purpose, ὥστε=result, εἰ=condition, διότι/ὅτι=causal

Step 3: PERICOPE CHECK (MANDATORY — DO NOT SKIP)
   │
   ├─ Use DISCOURSE_SUMMARY (NT) or PARAGRAPH_MARKERS (OT) from data-retriever
   ├─ Check A: Do discourse markers indicate a break WITHIN the range?
   ├─ Check B: Does the passage TRUNCATE a larger discourse unit?
   │  │
   │  │  Truncation indicators (any ONE triggers a warning):
   │  │  - Passage ends mid-sentence or mid-clause chain
   │  │  - Subordinating connectives (ἵνα, ὅτι, γάρ) in subsequent verses
   │  │    link back to the passage's argument
   │  │  - Passage covers part of a recognizable form (thanksgiving,
   │  │    prayer, chiasm, inclusio) that extends beyond the endpoint
   │  │  - Standard pericope divisions (NA28/UBS paragraph markers,
   │  │    scholarly consensus) place the boundary differently
   │  │
   │  │  Example: Phil 1:3-8 truncates the thanksgiving prayer that
   │  │  runs through 1:11 (vv. 9-11 contain the prayer content
   │  │  introduced by the ἵνα clause). Recommend EXTEND to 1:3-11.
   │  │
   │  └─ If truncated → Boundaries PROBLEMATIC
   │
   ├─ Boundaries OK (both checks pass)? → Proceed to Step 4
   │
   └─ Boundaries PROBLEMATIC (either check fails)?
      │
      ├─ STOP. Print the ⚠️ warning BEFORE anything else.
      │  Format: "⚠️ Boundary check: [Book] [Range] may be a partial unit..."
      │  This warning must appear BEFORE the "# Exegetical Notes" header.
      │  Do NOT embed it in Section 1. Print it FIRST, separately.
      │
      └─ Then proceed to Step 4 (with boundary issue noted in Pericope Status)

Step 4: Web search for Tier 3 scholarly sources
   → Prefer Tier A/B (NICNT, NIGTC, ICC, WBC, BECNT, Hermeneia, BDAG)
   → Note author, title, publisher

Step 5: Generate ALL 10 sections using EXACT template titles (Rule 6)
   Every section is mandatory. Never skip, rename, or merge sections.
   Use data-retriever compressed summaries as the data foundation.

Step 6: Cross-check data claims against MCP tool output
   → Call MCP tools DIRECTLY to verify specific claims from the notes
   → This is a verification step — do not use data-retriever for cross-check

Step 7: Fix any mismatches found in cross-check

Step 8: DELIVER OUTPUT
   │
   ├─ --output print? → Print ALL 10 sections inline. Do NOT save to file.
   │                     Do NOT summarize. The full document goes in the response.
   │
   └─ --output file (or default)? → Save to file path. Report path to user.

Output Format (All 10 Sections Required — Use Exact Titles)

# Exegetical Notes: [Book] [Range]

**Generated:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Passage:** [Book Chapter:Verse-Chapter:Verse] (SBLGNT/NA28 for NT; MT/OSHB for OT)
**Genre:** [epistle | narrative | poetry | prophecy | wisdom | apocalyptic]
**Pericope Status:** [Valid unit | Extended from user input | Confirmed problematic — noted in Section 1]

---

## 1. Passage in Literary Context

[Where this unit sits in the book's argument or narrative arc]
[Connection to preceding unit — what it follows from]
[Connection to following unit — what leads into next section]
[If --context provided: reference the segmentation context]
[If pericope check found issues: note here]

## 2. Internal Structure

[Clause-level structure using discourse features]
[Table required:]

| Verses | Element | Function |
|--------|---------|----------|
| [range] | [label] | [discourse role] |

[Levinsohn feature names cited for internal divisions]
[Masoretic markers cited for OT internal structure]

## 3. Propositional Summary

[The passage's central proposition in 1-2 sentences]
[Secondary propositions if argument is complex]
[Keep strictly descriptive — no Tier 4 claims here]

## 4. Lexical Analysis

[For each key lemma:]
**[Greek/Hebrew] ([reference])**: lemma [lemma form], [full parsing] [query_morphology]
Gloss: "[translation]"
[Semantic group from semantic_groups.yaml if applicable]
Frequency in [book]: Nx (ch:v, ch:v, ...) [VERSE_REFERENCES or query_morphology word_filter]
[Significance for passage interpretation]

[Flag hapax legomena or unusual forms]
[Note semantic range if relevant to interpretive decision]

## 5. Exegetical Conclusions

[Numbered list of defensible interpretive claims]
[Each grounded in sections 2-4]
[Example:]
1. [Claim grounded in morphology — cite the parsing]
2. [Claim grounded in discourse structure — cite the feature]
3. [Claim grounded in intertextual connection — cite the link]

[For passages dominated by imperative verbs: at least one conclusion must trace
the indicative theological ground within the discourse unit that warrants the
commands. Imperatives without their indicative base are moralism, not exegesis.]

[At least one conclusion must note the passage's theological connection to the
broader biblical arc — the full cross-testament link is developed in Section 8.
See Section 8 for genre-specific exceptions (wisdom literature, short letters).]

## 6. Interpretive Guardrails

[For each common misreading:]

### [Misreading description]

**Tier 1: Linguistic Evidence**
[How morphology/grammar contradicts this reading]
[Cite: specific parsing, form, or grammatical construction]

**Tier 2: Discourse Evidence**
[How discourse structure contradicts this reading]
[Cite: specific Levinsohn feature or Masoretic marker]

**Tier 3: Scholarly Consensus** (web-verified)
[Citation: Author, Title, Publisher, Year, pp.]
[Tier level: A | B | C — state if C]

**Tier 4: Agent Assessment**
[Clearly labeled as agent assessment, not established fact]

## 7. Open Questions

[Unresolved exegetical issues where data is insufficient]
[Areas of genuine scholarly debate]
[Questions this analysis cannot settle]
[What additional research would be needed]

## 8. Intertextual Links

[Cross-references with verse citations]
[Format: "Reference → Connection to current passage"]
[OT quotations or allusions (call query_ot_quotes for NT passages)]
[Semantic group connections across testaments]
[Parallel passages with significant differences noted]

**Redemptive-historical connection (genre-graduated, mandatory):**
- **Epistles, narrative, prophecy, apocalyptic:** At least one cross-testament link
  placing the passage in the redemptive-historical arc (Creation → Promise →
  Fulfillment → Consummation). For NT: trace to OT promise/fulfillment.
  For OT narrative/prophecy: note forward trajectory or typological significance.
- **Wisdom literature (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs):** Connection encouraged
  but not mandatory. If present, ground in wisdom theology (e.g., Prov 8 → Col 1:15-17).
  If not naturally present, state: "This passage operates within wisdom genre where
  redemptive-historical connections are indirect."
- **Short personal letters (Philemon, 2-3 John, Jude):** A note connecting to broader
  Pauline/Johannine/apostolic theology suffices. Do not force OT connections where the
  text itself makes none.

## 9. Data Sources

- MorphGNT/SBLGNT (CC BY-SA 3.0) — morphological parsing via query_morphology MCP tool
- [OR] Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible morphhb (CC BY 4.0) — Hebrew morphology
- Levinsohn GNT Discourse Features (dataset 2016; book: Levinsohn 2000) — discourse analysis via query_discourse_features MCP tool
- [OR] Sefaria / OpenScriptures paragraph markers — Masoretic structure
- [Vocabulary source: query_vocabulary MCP tool with per-book data]
- [Semantic groups: semantic_groups.yaml]
- [Tier 3 sources: full citations as used in Section 6]

## 10. Verification

**MCP cross-check results:**
- Data claims checked: [N]
- Claims confirmed (PASS): [N]
- Claims corrected: [N — list each correction below if any]
- Claims not cross-checkable: [N — e.g., Tier 3 citations, semantic notes]
- Overall: [PASS | CORRECTED]

[If corrections made: list each original claim, the MCP query result, and the correction]

Invocation Format

/exegetical-notes Phil 1:1-11
/exegetical-notes Phil 1:1-11 --output print
/exegetical-notes Genesis 37:2-11
/exegetical-notes Romans 3:21-26
/exegetical-notes Genesis 37:2-11 --context "segmentation: Joseph narrative, 8 sessions"

• --output: Optional. file (default) saves to disk. print outputs inline.
• --context: Optional. Provides segmentation context for Section 1.
• Book names accept abbreviations (Phil, Gen, Rom, etc.) or full names.
• Testament auto-detected from book name.

Reference Data Access

NT Morphological Data

Call mcp__plugin_claude-of-alexandria_claude-of-alexandria-mcp__query_morphology with {"book": "[Book]", "range": "[chapter:verse-chapter:verse]"}

OT Morphological Data

Call mcp__plugin_claude-of-alexandria_claude-of-alexandria-mcp__query_morphology with {"book": "[Book]", "testament": "ot", "range": "[chapter:verse-chapter:verse]"}

Vocabulary Frequencies

Call mcp__plugin_claude-of-alexandria_claude-of-alexandria-mcp__query_vocabulary with {"book": "[Book]", "testament": "[nt|ot]"}

Levinsohn Discourse Features (NT)

Call mcp__plugin_claude-of-alexandria_claude-of-alexandria-mcp__query_discourse_features with {"book": "[Book]"}

Masoretic Markers (OT)

Call mcp__plugin_claude-of-alexandria_claude-of-alexandria-mcp__query_paragraph_breaks with {"book": "[Book]"}

Claim Verification

Cross-reference MCP tool output against cited verse and morphological claims.

Semantic Groups

Located at: skills/biblical-segmentation/reference/vocabulary/semantic_groups.yaml

Semantic Groups Reference

Key semantic families from semantic_groups.yaml (for Section 4 connections):

Common Failure Patterns (Red Flags)

Example Output Fragment: Section 4 (Lexical Analysis)

## 4. Lexical Analysis

**ἐναρξάμενος (1:6)**: lemma ἐνάρχομαι, aorist middle participle,
nominative singular masculine [query_morphology]
Gloss: "having begun"
Semantic note: Middle voice is significant — "begun in/among themselves" or
reflexive causative. Contrast with active voice ἐναρχόμενος (not attested here).
Frequency in Philippians: 1x (this passage) [query_vocabulary]

**ἐπιτελέσει (1:6)**: lemma ἐπιτελέω, future active indicative,
3rd person singular [query_morphology]
Gloss: "will complete/finish"
Temporal referent: ἄχρι ἡμέρας Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ — eschatological frame.
Frequency in Philippians: 1x [query_vocabulary]

**χαρά (1:4)**: lemma χαρά (noun), [not a verb form — check pos in morphology data]
Frequency in Philippians: 5x (1:4, 1:25, 2:2, 2:29, 4:1) [query_vocabulary]
Semantic group: Joy family — see also χαίρω (9x in Philippians) [semantic_groups.yaml]