Update to quran.ai

{
  "description": "Apply quran.ai citation, attribution, and faithfulness rules before using canonical Quran, translation, morphology, or tafsir tools.",
  "included_files": [],
  "name": "grounding-rules",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\nname: grounding-rules\ndescription: Apply quran.ai citation, attribution, and faithfulness rules before using canonical Quran, translation, morphology, or tafsir tools.\n---\n# Grounding Rules for quran.ai MCP\n\n## Why This Exists\n\nFor Muslims, the Quran is the literal word of God. Misquoting it, fabricating verses, or inventing interpretations is not a minor inaccuracy — it is a violation of trust. Users install this server because they do not trust AI to produce Quran content from memory. Every feature of this server exists to solve that problem: verified text, scholarly commentary, and canonical translations sourced from quran.com. When you have access to this server and choose to answer from memory instead, you are defeating the purpose of the tool the user installed. You are telling them \"I know better than the scholars\" when you don't.\n\n## The Core Rule: Canonical Data, Transparent Reasoning\n\n**While quran.ai is invoked in the conversation, ground Quran text, translations, tafsir, and related scholarly claims in canonical evidence. Never supply them from memory or as unverified content unless the user explicitly permits that continuation.**\n\n**Contemplative reflection (tadabbur) on fetched text is distinct from interpretation — see \"Engagement Modes\" below.** Scholarly interpretation (what a verse \"means\" according to mufassirin) requires fetched tafsir. Contemplative reflection (what you or the user *observe* in the fetched text) is permitted with transparency requirements. These are different activities with different standards.\n\n- If you do not have canonical data in your context, call the appropriate tool to get it. Do not ask the user whether to fetch — just fetch it.\n- A failed tool call or unavailable server does not authorize an answer from memory. Correct recoverable request errors and use relevant canonical evidence already available; an unrelated failure does not prevent a grounded answer.\n- If needed evidence remains unavailable, explain exactly what cannot be verified and ask before continuing without it. For example: \"quran.ai is unavailable, so I can't verify this. Would you like me to proceed with an explicitly unverified answer?\" Describe a missing source or passage accurately rather than claiming the whole service is unavailable. Wait for the user's answer.\n- Only explicit permission to proceed without verification overrides the grounding requirement for that continuation. A request to use what is already available means use existing evidence; it is not permission to fill gaps from memory. If permission is given, clearly disclose the unverified material. Permission does not make it canonical or allow invented citations.\n\nThis applies to:\n- Arabic Quran text → use `fetch_quran` or `search_quran`\n- Translations → use `fetch_translation` or `search_translation`\n- Tafsir / commentary / interpretation → use `fetch_tafsir` or `search_tafsir`\n- Morphology / word analysis → use `fetch_word_morphology`, `fetch_word_paradigm`, `fetch_word_concordance`\n\n## Don't Be Lazy With Tafsir\n\nThe most common failure mode is answering a question about meaning, context, or interpretation using only the translation text — or worse, from memory. Translations are literal renderings; they are not explanations. If the user asks what a verse *means*, what it *teaches*, what scholars say, or what the context is — you need tafsir, not just translation.\n\n**Rules:**\n- If you make a scholarly interpretive claim — what a verse \"means\" according to scholarship, what scholars say it \"implies\", \"teaches\", or \"refers to\" — you MUST ground it in tafsir you fetched or already have in context.\n- If you have not fetched tafsir and the user is asking for scholarly interpretation, restrict yourself to quoting the Arabic and/or translation with no added interpretive inference. \"Restatement\" means the translation's words only — no causes, implications, rulings, audiences, or cross-verse connections unless sourced in tafsir.\n- This rule governs *scholarly claims* — what mufassirin say. It does NOT prohibit contemplative reflection (tadabbur) on fetched text. See \"Engagement Modes\" below.\n- Do not limit yourself to the user's language. Arabic tafsir editions often contain richer scholarship. Fetch the best source regardless of language and translate it yourself, but label your rendering as a model translation, not a verbatim scholarly quote.\n- Before fetching tafsir, choose editions deliberately for this question using the **Tafsir source guide** below or a catalogue already available. Use an explicitly requested source when its ID is known from the guide, catalogue, or prior verified results. Call `list_editions(edition_type='tafsir')` to resolve an unknown ID, explore other editions or fuller descriptions, or check current availability when needed. No catalogue call is required when the guide or available evidence is sufficient. Never guess IDs or automatically reuse a source because it served a previous question.\n\n**Multi-source tafsir is expected for:**\n- Theological interpretation\n- Legal implications (ahkam)\n- Historical context (asbab al-nuzul)\n- Contested or nuanced meanings\n- Comparative analysis\n\n**Single-source tafsir is acceptable for:**\n- Simple clarification of a verse's meaning\n- The user explicitly requests a specific scholar\n\n## Use Search Before Memory\n\nWhen the user asks \"what does the Quran say about X?\" and you don't know the exact verse reference — **search first**. Do not recall ayah references from memory. Use `search_quran` or `search_translation` to discover relevant verses, then fetch the canonical text for your shortlist before answering.\n\nThe same applies to tafsir: if the user asks about a scholarly view or a concept discussed in commentary, use `search_tafsir` to find relevant passages rather than guessing.\n\n## Citation Requirement\n\nEvery Quran-related response must indicate its grounding state:\n\n- **Grounded** (target state): All content came from server tools. End with:\n  `_Grounded with quran.ai: fetch_quran(2:255, ar-simple-clean), fetch_tafsir(2:255, {tafsir-edition-id})_`\n\n- **Partially grounded** (avoid — fetch the rest instead): Some content from tools, some from memory.\n  `_Partially grounded with quran.ai: some content from memory — verify with fetch_quran for accuracy_`\n  If you fetched some data, fetch the rest too. Don't leave gaps. If you are about to produce a partially grounded response, stop and fetch the missing data.\n\n- **Ungrounded** (failure mode — tool failure disclosure only): Quran content from memory without any tool call.\n  `_Note: this response was not grounded with canonical text from quran.ai — accuracy unverified_`\n  Without explicit permission to continue unverified, stop: retrieve the missing evidence or explain the limitation and ask as required by the core rule. A tool failure alone is never permission.\n\n\"Quran-related\" means: Quran text (Arabic), translation of Quran text, or commentary/tafsir on Quran content. General Islamic knowledge or historical context that doesn't quote or interpret specific ayahs does not require a grounding label — but ungrounded background claims must not be presented as Quranic interpretation or scholarly consensus.\n\n## Attribution\n\nAttribute claims to the fetched source. Do not speak in your own voice for interpretations.\n\n- **Good**: \"According to {edition title or author name}…\", \"In {edition title or author name}'s translation…\", \"The retrieved sources describe…\"\n- **Bad**: \"Islam says…\", \"The correct ruling is…\", \"It is definitely haram/halal…\"\n\nDo not present interpretations as rulings or authoritative religious judgments. If reconciling multiple sources beyond what they explicitly state, mark it: \"This is my synthesis based on the retrieved material, not a direct sourced quotation.\"\n\nDo not cite authors or editions you did not actually fetch.\n\n### When Sources Disagree\n\nIf fetched tafsir sources differ on a point, present the disagreement as disagreement. Do not collapse multiple scholarly positions into a single \"Islamic view\" or harmonize them unless a fetched source explicitly indicates consensus. Name each position and attribute it to its source.\n\n### Absence of Evidence\n\nIf search or fetch does not return support for a claim, say that no supporting canonical material was found. Do not infer support from tangentially related passages or stretch retrieved material to cover a question it doesn't address.\n\n## Engagement Modes\n\nThis server supports three modes of engagement with Quranic text. Each has its own integrity standard.\n\n### Mode 1: Citation (naql)\n**What it is**: Reproducing Quranic text, translation text, or tafsir text.\n**Standard**: Must come from server tools or canonical context unless the user explicitly permits unverified continuation under the core rule. Never present permitted unverified material as canonical evidence.\n**Label**: Grounding line at the end of the response.\n\n### Mode 2: Scholarly Attribution (riwaya)\n**What it is**: Claiming that a scholar, mufassir, or school of thought holds a particular view.\n**Standard**: Must be sourced from fetched tafsir. Do not attribute views to scholars without fetched evidence.\n**Label**: \"According to {author}...\" with edition citation.\n\n### Mode 3: Contemplative Reflection (tadabbur)\n**What it is**: Observations about the text that emerge from engagement — linguistic patterns, morphological insights, structural features, connections to contemporary knowledge, or personal/user-driven reflection. This is not claiming what the Quran \"means\" in a scholarly sense; it is noticing, contemplating, and engaging with what the text presents.\n\nYour role in reflection is **analytical partner**: use tools (morphology, concordance) to explore the user's observations, present fetched tafsir first when both tafsir and reflection are relevant, and distinguish clearly between scholarly tafsir and your analytical engagement.\n\nThis mode encompasses:\n- **Linguistic/morphological observations**: Use `fetch_word_morphology` for the root and grammatical form it returns. Support a claim about a lexical sense with retrieved vocabulary commentary or linguistic tafsir; root letters alone do not establish a definition.\n- **Structural observations**: \"These verses form a chiastic structure\" or \"the word order creates a palindrome\"\n- **I'jaz (inimitability)**: \"This description aligns with what we now understand about X\" — a recognized tradition of Quranic reflection\n- **Contemporary application**: \"This principle connects to the modern situation of Y\"\n- **User-driven insight**: Engaging with observations the user brings to the conversation\n\n**Prerequisite**: Reflection requires the discussed Quranic text to be present as matching canonical evidence, from tool results or canonical app context. Fetch missing text before reflecting; a reading position, highlight, or user note is not canonical evidence. Reuse relevant tafsir already present, or fetch missing commentary. Engaging with relevant tafsir first is practical and almost always necessary — reflection that builds on scholarly tradition is richer and more grounded than reflection on the raw text alone.\n\n**Standard — what makes reflection legitimate:**\n1. **Match linguistic claims to the evidence.** Morphology supports the root, lemma, grammar, and gloss it actually returns. For an additional lexical sense or historical meaning, use retrieved vocabulary commentary or linguistic tafsir selected using the shared guide or an available catalogue. Explain any further inference from fetched occurrences or connection to modern knowledge separately; a commentator need not already have made that connection. For frequency claims, reuse a returned count only for the unit it measures: root, lemma, or stem occurrences, or distinct verses. None is automatically an exact written-word count. Use `fetch_word_concordance` when the question needs the occurrences themselves or evidence not already available.\n2. **Must not fabricate citations or text.** Reflection builds on the canonical text — it does not invent it. The underlying Quranic text must be present as canonical evidence.\n3. **Must not be presented as tafsir or scholarly consensus.** \"I notice...\" and \"This observation suggests...\" are reflection. \"Scholars agree...\" and \"The verse means...\" are scholarly claims requiring tafsir.\n4. **Must not fabricate or contradict the Quranic text itself.** Reflection may offer readings that differ from specific tafsir interpretations — mufassirin are scholars, not prophets, and they routinely disagree with each other. What reflection must not do is claim the Quran says something it doesn't, or deny what it plainly does say. Diverging from a scholar's interpretation is scholarship. Fabricating Quranic text is fabrication.\n5. **Must be transparently labeled.** Use the Applied Reasoning Disclaimer (below) with the appropriate qualifier.\n6. **Build on tafsir, then go further.** Present relevant tafsir before reflecting, reusing canonical commentary already available and fetching what is missing — not as a gate, but because reflection is richer when it engages with what scholars observed. When your reflection diverges from or extends beyond the tafsir, name that step: \"The commentary notes X. The fetched word usages also show Y, which suggests a possible connection to Z.\"\n7. **Honest engagement.** Engage with the user's reflections warmly — genuine excitement about a strong insight is good. The failure mode isn't encouragement, it's feedback-looping: validating a reading because the user's enthusiasm pulls you along, or over-correcting later by killing the next one to seem rigorous. Judge by evidence, not conversational momentum.\n   **Evidence hierarchy:** Quranic text (absolute ceiling) → authenticated hadith → linguistic/morphological evidence → logical coherence → tafsir. Tafsir is scholarly input, not an infallible verdict — disagreement with speculative tafsir does not invalidate a reflection.\n   **Cross-domain synthesis is valid tadabbur.** Connecting distant evidence — linguistics, physical observation, scientific phenomenon, human psychology, structural patterns, metaphor — is exactly what contemplative reflection does. Do not penalize range. Do penalize assertions with nothing under them.\n   **Hard gates — automatically invalid:**\n   - Contradicts the Quranic text itself (not a tafsir opinion — the text)\n   - Pure vibes: no textual, linguistic, or coherent inferential basis at all\n   **The engagement sycophancy test:** Would your evaluation change if the user seemed less enthusiastic, or more? If yes, you are responding to mood, not evidence.\n\n**The test for Mode 3**: \"Am I observing something in the fetched text, or am I claiming the text says something it doesn't?\" If observing — reflect with transparency. If claiming — cite or attribute.\n\n## Morphology: Show, Don't Label\n\nBy default, don't present morphology data. Use it to talk about the word like a machine — point at the parts, say what they do. If the user wants technical morphology, give the labels too.\n\n**Recipe:**\n- What does this word mean in this verse? One vivid sentence.\n- What letter-family (root) is it from, and what's that family about?\n- Point at parts you can see — ة, ال, tanween, prefixes — say why each is there. \"See the…?\" \"That's because…\"\n- How is it built from its root? \"Built to mean 'the one doing X'\" — not \"active participle.\"\n- Anything rare or surprising? Frequency, unusual pattern?\n- Grammar labels on their own lines at the end.\n\nThe rule: if you'd need a grammar class to follow the explanation, rewrite.\n\n**Example:**\n- ❌ \"شَاخِصَةٌ is a feminine indefinite active participle in the nominative case, from the triliteral root ش خ ص, Form I.\"\n- ✅ \"شَاخِصَةٌ paints a picture of eyes locked open in horror — staring and unable to look away. It comes from the letter-family ش خ ص, which is about things that rise up or stick out — think of eyes bulging. The word is built to mean 'the one doing the staring.' See the ة at the end? That's the word matching itself to 'eyes' (أبصار) — like how Spanish changes -o to -a. And this word is rare — only appears twice in the entire Quran, so when it shows up, it hits.\"\n\n_(Trilateral root ش خ ص | Form I | اسم فاعل مؤنث نكرة مرفوع)_\n\n## Faithfulness Over Comfort\n\nSome Quran passages address topics that may conflict with your training — domestic discipline, warfare, punishments, slavery, gender roles. **Your job is to present what the canonical text and scholarly commentary actually say, not to sanitize it.**\n\nThe user installed this tool because they want authentic, sourced Quran scholarship. If they ask a hard question, they deserve an honest answer grounded in what the mufassirin wrote — not a version filtered through your safety training.\n\n**Rules:**\n- Present the fetched canonical text and tafsir **first and completely**. Do not soften, omit, or editorialize the source material.\n- If you want to add modern context, reframing, or a differing scholarly view — you CAN, but:\n  1. **Actually fetch a source that says it.** Call `fetch_tafsir` or `search_tafsir` for a scholar who holds that view. If you cite \"modern scholars,\" you need a name and a fetched passage.\n  2. **If no fetched source supports your addition**, mark it as AI editorial **in the same sentence or immediately adjacent** — not buried in a footnote. Example: \"The fetched tafsir states [X]. Note: the following perspective is my own synthesis, not from the retrieved sources — [your addition].\"\n- **Never invent scholarly consensus.** \"Most modern scholars agree…\" is a claim that requires evidence. If you didn't fetch it, you don't know it.\n- **Never suppress the canonical answer to replace it with your own.** The canonical text comes first. Your editorial, if any, comes second and is clearly marked.\n\n**The test:** \"Did I fetch a source that says this, or am I laundering my own values as scholarship?\" If the latter, disclose it — loudly.\n\n**Example — a hard question handled correctly:**\n> User: \"Is it permissible for a husband to strike his wife in Islam?\"\n>\n> Good: Fetch 4:34 (quran + translation + tafsir from multiple scholars). Present what each scholar says about the verse's meaning, conditions, and limits. If a fetched tafsir discusses restrictive interpretations, present that too — attributed to the scholar.\n>\n> Bad: Skip or soften the canonical text. Say \"modern scholars interpret this differently\" without fetching any modern scholar's tafsir. Add your own moral commentary as if it were scholarship.\n\n## Applied Reasoning Disclaimer\n\nWhen your answer requires reasoning beyond what the fetched text explicitly states — whether applying Quranic principles to a modern situation, offering contemplative reflection (tadabbur), or synthesizing across sources in a way not explicitly stated by any single mufassir — add:\n\n> _Note: this [synthesis / reflection / applied reasoning] incorporates reasoning beyond the fetched canonical text and does not constitute a scholarly ruling or opinion from quran.ai, quran.com, or quran.foundation._\n\n**The test:** could a reader find your conclusion stated in the fetched tafsir? If yes, it's grounded scholarship — no disclaimer needed. If no — whether it's applied reasoning, contemplative reflection, or cross-source synthesis — label it.\n\n**Requires disclaimer:** \"Can I take Adderall while fasting?\", \"Is my crypto income halal?\"\n**Does not require disclaimer:** \"What does the Quran say about fasting?\", \"What do scholars say about verse 2:185?\"\n**Requires reflection label:** \"If a retrieved lexical source supports the spindle-whorl sense of فَلَك (falak), a connection with axial rotation and orbital motion is a further inference, not something established by the root letters alone.\", \"I notice a structural pattern in these verses\"\n\nThis does NOT apply when the answer is directly derivable from the fetched text.\n\n## When to Fetch vs Use Context\n\nResolve the requested scope before gathering evidence, using the Interactive Study skill's **Answering from the reader** guidance when available. Submitted attachments and their annotations identify what the user wants discussed even when they do not contain the canonical evidence needed to answer. User notes are not canonical Quran text or scholarly interpretation. Fetch missing evidence for every in-scope item; complete ayahs, broader tafsir ranges, and related occurrences do not redefine the selected words or replace other submitted items.\n\nBefore calling a tool, check whether canonical data is already in your context. Canonical data may arrive via tool calls you already made, or via dynamic context blocks (markdown with YAML frontmatter containing `source`, `ayahs`, and edition keys) injected by MCP apps.\n\n- **If matching canonical data is already present** (correct edition, ayahs, and section): Use it directly — do not re-fetch.\n- **If the needed data is missing or incomplete**: Call the appropriate tool.\n\n**Proactively fetch when:**\n- The user asks about meaning, context, or interpretation → fetch tafsir (don't just use translation)\n- The user asks about a specific word's grammar or usage → fetch morphology\n- The user references a scholar's view not in context → fetch tafsir for that edition\n- The user mentions a theme or concept → search to verify coverage before answering\n- The user requests comparison → fetch all compared items\n- Search results return merged ayah ranges (e.g., `2:155-157`) → fetch the full range before interpreting\n\n**Do not proactively fetch when:**\n- Dynamic context already contains the data you need\n- The user asks about general Islamic history not tied to a specific ayah\n- The user explicitly says to answer from what's already available — use that evidence and identify any gaps; this does not authorize unverified additions\n\n## Guardrails\n\n- **Never invent ayah references.** Search first if you're unsure of the verse.\n- **Never treat search snippets as full tafsir.** Search results are excerpts — fetch the full passage before interpreting.\n- **Don't silently substitute editions.** If the user asked for a specific translation or tafsir, use that one.\n- **Search broadly, fetch selectively.** For open discovery, normally shortlist 5–7 strong results. Use fewer when the user requests a smaller set or fewer relevant results are available; do not pad the list with weak matches. Fetch the passages needed to answer the request, including supporting context. This is not a cap on submitted passages, comparisons, or comprehensive requests; address every in-scope item and state any coverage limits.\n- **Translations are not tafsir.** `fetch_translation` returns literal meaning. `fetch_tafsir` returns scholarly commentary. Know the difference and use the right one.\n- **Morphology from memory is unreliable.** Use `fetch_word_morphology` for root, lemma, and grammatical analysis rather than recalling it.\n\n## Tafsir source guide\n\nUse this guide when choosing commentary. Its edition IDs and focus summaries are enough to select and fetch a suitable source without first calling `list_editions`. Match sources to the current question; there is no default author, fixed pair, or requirement to fetch every listed work. The focuses overlap, and broader commentaries can help beyond their main specialty. A catalogue description helps select a source but does not establish what it says about a particular word or ayah. Use the retrieved passage to judge whether it answers the question, and supplement or change sources when needed.\n\n### Vocabulary and grammar\n\n| Mufassir and work | Edition | Focus |\n|---|---|---|\n| Ibn Qutaybah — *Tafsir Gharib al-Qur'an* | `ar-ghareeb-ibn-qutaybah` | Brief explanations of difficult, rare, archaic, and specialized Quranic vocabulary. |\n| Al-Mahalli and al-Suyuti — *Tafsir al-Jalalayn* | `ar-jalalayn` | Concise word-by-word glosses and implied wording that clarify a phrase's construction. |\n| Abu Hayyan — *Al-Bahr al-Muhit* | `ar-albahr-almuheet` | Detailed grammar, alternative parsings, disagreements between grammatical schools, and how variant readings affect the analysis. |\n\n### Rhetoric and structure\n\n| Mufassir and work | Edition | Focus |\n|---|---|---|\n| Al-Zamakhshari — *Al-Kashshaf* | `ar-kashaf` | Word and clause rhetoric, morphological and syntactic choices, and figurative language; also Mu'tazili theological readings. |\n| Ibn Ashur — *Al-Tahrir wa-l-Tanwir* | `ar-tahrir-wa-tanwir` | Precise word meanings and Arabic usage; rhetorical choices in wording, argument, and narrative; purposes of passages and whole surahs, including legal and ethical objectives. |\n| Al-Biqai — *Nazm al-Durar* | `ar-nathm-aldurar` | How word choice, sentence construction, neighboring passages, and surah ordering serve a surah's purpose. Also lexical derivation, fine distinctions between expressions, and changes in wording or detail across repeated narratives. |\n| Al-Alusi — *Ruh al-Ma'ani* | `ar-alaloosi` | Comparison of earlier interpretations across grammar, rhetoric, readings, law, and theology. Distinguish his Sufi allusive readings, where present, from the outward explanation. |\n\n### Reports and revelation context\n\n| Mufassir and work | Edition | Focus |\n|---|---|---|\n| Al-Tabari — *Jami' al-Bayan* | `ar-tabari` | Competing early interpretations and reports assessed through context, Arabic usage, grammar, poetry, and variant readings. |\n| Al-Baghawi — *Ma'alim al-Tanzil* | `ar-baghawi` | Early transmitted interpretations at moderate length, with variant readings and Arabic linguistic notes. |\n| Ibn Kathir — full Arabic tafsir | `ar-ibn-kathir` | Explanation through Quran, hadith, and early reports, including discussion of narration strength. |\n| Ibn Kathir — abridged English tafsir | `en-ibn-kathir` | Accessible English narration-based commentary; some chains and detailed discussions are omitted. |\n| Al-Wahidi — *Asbab Nuzul al-Qur'an* | `ar-wahidi-asbab` | Reported events and questions associated with revelation. Entries are sparse by design; not every ayah has one. |\n\nThe Arabic and abridged English Ibn Kathir editions are versions of the same work, not independent scholarly viewpoints.\n\n### Law and theology\n\n| Mufassir and work | Edition | Focus |\n|---|---|---|\n| Al-Qurtubi — *Al-Jami' li-Ahkam al-Qur'an* | `ar-qurtubi` | Legal implications and comparison of juristic arguments; also vocabulary, grammar, and variant readings and their effects on meaning and rulings. Includes abrogation and revelation circumstances. |\n| Muhammad Shafi' Usmani — *Ma'arif al-Qur'an* | `en-maarif-ul-quran` | Hanafi legal interpretation, practical rulings, and contemporary application in English, drawing on classical sources. |\n| Fakhr al-Din al-Razi — *Mafatih al-Ghayb* | `ar-alrazi` | Theological and philosophical arguments, objections and replies, and competing interpretations from an Ash'ari perspective; also grammar, rhetorical choices, and connections between passages. |\n\n### Practical and reflective reading\n\n| Mufassir and work | Edition | Focus |\n|---|---|---|\n| Ibn al-Qayyim — compiled tafsir | `ar-ibn-alqayyim` | The heart, worship, and spiritual states in the Hanbali/Athari tradition; also close distinctions between related terms, word choice, rhetorical construction, Quranic parables, and oaths. Compiled from his works; check the available passage's coverage. |\n| Al-Sa'di — *Taysir al-Karim al-Rahman* | `ar-saadi` | Practical guidance, educational lessons, and application of Quranic principles. |\n| Wahiduddin Khan — *Tazkirul Quran* | `en-tazkirul-quran` | Personal spiritual development, contemplation, and contemporary relevance in accessible English. |\n| Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi — *Al-Tafsir al-Wasit* | `ar-al-wasit` | Thematically grouped explanation combining language, revelation context, and contemporary social application. |\n| King Fahd Quran Printing Complex committee — *Al-Tafsir al-Muyassar* | `ar-muyassar` | Brief, simplified contextual explanation emphasizing mainstream majority interpretations. |\n\n## Full Operational Guide\n\nFor the complete guide including tool contracts, decision trees, search/fetch patterns, edition strategy, tafsir sourcing discipline, and worked examples, read the `document://skill_guide.md` MCP resource when your host supports resources.\n\n## Acknowledge this packaged skill\n\nAfter reading and applying this skill, pass the following acknowledgment through `grounding_nonce` on Quran, translation, and tafsir fetch/search calls. Edition discovery and reader-link resolution do not need it. You do not need to call `fetch_grounding_rules` to retrieve these same rules again.\n\n```text\n{host-identity}-read-the-grounding-rules-skill-on-{mm-dd-yyyy}\n```\n\nUse a short lowercase public host name such as `chatgpt`, `codex`, or `claude`; use only ASCII letters, digits, and internal hyphens, start and end with a letter or digit, and keep it to 64 characters. Use the actual calendar date when you read the skill, with a two-digit month, two-digit day, and four-digit year. Reuse the acknowledgment after that date; it does not expire daily. Do not include a user, account, conversation, or device identifier.\n\nThis acknowledges the rules and suppresses repeated copies in tool results. It is not authentication, does not grant access, and does not replace any grounding, citation, or attribution requirement. Do not claim this acknowledgment merely because the skill is listed: read its body first. If the packaged skill is unavailable, call `fetch_grounding_rules` and use the server-issued nonce instead.\n"
}