zotero_get_item_related

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the operation as read-only and explains the relation field link, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, behavior when no relations exist, or other side effects. This is adequate but minimal.

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?

The description is a single sentence with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action ('Get') and clearly structured for quick parsing.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description is mostly complete. It could mention that results are scoped to the current library, but this is likely implied by the tool's context. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

The input schema already describes 'item_key' as 'Zotero item key/ID' with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond restating the relation mechanism. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves 'related items' for a specific Zotero item, specifying they are linked via the 'relations' field. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like zotero_get_item_children (children) and zotero_get_item_metadata (metadata).

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 when you need items linked via relations, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like zotero_get_item_children or zotero_get_item_fulltext. No exclusions or when-not guidelines are provided.

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