Let’s talk about “Biblically accurate” angels! This gets a little long.
First off, let me point out some background. The Bible isn’t a single book. It’s a collection of writings, composed by different people at different times for different purposes, each of which has been edited by later people entirely to fit entirely different purposes. Even for a single book, it’s often difficult to establish what parts go back to the original author, and even more difficult to establish who those authors were.
(I know there are believers who claim that the whole thing was dictated by God, but that’s not a claim that anything in the Bible actually makes. Perhaps you’re thinking of the Koran?)
So these different writers had different ideas of what angels were, what they looked like, and what functions they served. Later writers -- most notably Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (circa the late 5th or early 6th century CE) on the Christian side and Maimonides (late 12th century CE) on the Jewish side -- compiled all the mentions of angels and angel-like beings into hierarchies, codifying “Biblical” angels for later generations. Pseudo-Dionysius (so-callled because, whoever he was, he was claiming to be Dionysius of Athens, converted to Christianity by Paul in Acts 17:34) claimed three Spheres of angels, each with three Orders (for a total of nine), while Maimonides (rabbi and physician working in the Islamic courts) said there were ten ranks -- and each of these orders or ranks or choirs or whatnot could be completely different creatures, depending on who you listen to.
To go back to first principles, the word “angel” comes from the Greek word angelos (ἄγγελος), which means “messenger”. That’s the word used in the New Testament; in the Tanakh/Old Testament, it was the Greek translation of the Hebrew word mal’akh (מַלְאָךְ), which is essentially the same; the connotation is “one who is sent with a message”. Where this appears in the book of Genesis -- the location of 90% of traditional “Bible stories”, it seems always to be a creature that’s very much like a human, and indeed was often confused for being just another human. These are the ones that talk to Abraham and Lot and Jacob. It's entirely possible that many of them weren't considered divine beings at all, and were just humans doing the same sorts of things as people described later as prophets.
But there are also two different types of beings in there. The first is mentioned at the end of the Eden story -- to bar the now-expelled humans from the Garden, God places as guards cherubim and a flaming sword. “Cherubim” is the plural of “cherub”. (At some point in Italian art these got confused with the figures of spiritelli, putti, and erotes -- fat, wingy babies -- but they originally seem to have been much more like the Egyptian sphinx or the Mesopotamian lamassu -- a beast, a lion or a bull, with the face of a human, usually with added wings.) The cherubim were the exception to the commandment against graven images, as there were two mounted on the top of the Ark of the Covenant, to serve as God's earthly throne; He's referred to a few times as "He who is enthroned upon the cherubim".
The others are referred to as “the sons of God” -- who explicitly interbreed with human women and bring forth a race of giants, the nephilim. It really looks like this is a surviving remnant of early Hebrew polytheism, and these are just demigods, but when it became dogma that the primary god was the only God, they got retconned into half-angels.
But none of these are the critters that people are talking about when they say “Biblically accurate angels”. For them, we have to go to the book of Ezekiel. The eponymous prophet has a vision of first, humanoid “living creatures” with multiple faces and wings and stuff (who are later in the book identified as cherubim), and then four wheels "within wheels", with a bunch of eyes in the rims. On the wheels is a throne, and God sits on that. The wheels and throne are, together, God's chariot, but later writers decided that they were beings in their own right — they've got eyes, right? — terming them Ophanim, or thrones. Daniel has a similar vision, as do a lot of the non-canonical apocalypses of the second temple period.
Isaiah likewise describes (though not very clearly, none of these prophets do) beings with six wings — one pair to fly with, the other pairs covering their faces and their "feet" (pro tip: if the Old Testament mentions something weird about feet, it's likely a euphemism for a penis; c.f. Ruth and Boaz) — crying, "Holy, holy, holy", and calls them "seraphim". Later sources double down on their angelic status, but it's worth mentioning that everywhere else in the Tanakh, the words saraph and seraphim refer to serpents. So at least some depictions have them as flying snakes. Dragons? Isaiah says they have hands
Post-Old Testament works, including the Revelation of St. John, really multiply the kinds of weird critters that God has hanging around, and these are the ones that fill out Pseudo-Dionysus's list, but this is already too long.
My point is, a lot of the angels in the Bible just look like people. Sure, some angels start off by telling the people they've just appeared to, "Be not afraid" — but that's a thing you might need to tell a 14-year-old girl when you've just appeared in her bedroom at night, even if you aren't covered in eyeballs.
