Search Authored By
search_authored_byArticles by author name.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| rows | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| response | No | ||
| responseHeader | No | Response metadata from Solr |
search_authored_byArticles by author name.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| rows | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| response | No | ||
| responseHeader | No | Response metadata from Solr |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "name": "Jennifer Smith"
+ },
+ {
+ "name": "Robert Chen",
+ "rows": 50
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "response": {
+ "properties": {
+ "docs": {
+ "description": "Array of article documents",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "author_display": {
+ "description": "List of authors",
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Article DOI",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "journal": {
+ "description": "Journal name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "publication_date": {
+ "description": "Publication date",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "description": "Article title",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "numFound": {
+ "description": "Total number of matching documents",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "start": {
+ "description": "Starting position of results",
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "responseHeader": {
+ "description": "Response metadata from Solr",
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds no behavioral detail beyond the annotations; annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. There is no mention of pagination, matching behavior, or limitations, so the description adds minimal value.
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?
At six words, the description is undeniably short, but the brevity results in a fragment that omits key information; it is not well-structured for an AI agent.
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 tool has an output schema and rich annotations, the description could suffice if it explained the parameters and usage, but it does not. The lack of explanation for 'rows' and any context about result limits makes it incomplete.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only hints at the 'name' parameter via 'by author name.' The 'rows' parameter is entirely unexplained, and no format or syntax guidance is provided.
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 phrase 'Articles by author name' clearly identifies the resource (articles) and the filter (author name), though it lacks a verb and does not explicitly differentiate from the broader 'search' siblings. It conveys the core function effectively.
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 provides no information about when to use this tool instead of siblings like 'search' or 'search_within', and no preconditions or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.