Pubmed Convert Ids

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the meaningful PMC-indexing constraint, which is real behavioral information. However it says nothing about failure behavior for unmapped IDs, batch rate limits, or whether the PMC restriction applies equally to all three ID types.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the core operation stated first and the limiting condition immediately after.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the parameters are fully documented in the schema. Purpose and the key applicability constraint are both present; only edge-case behavior (unresolvable IDs, rate limits) is missing.

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 100%, so both parameters (ids, input_type) are already documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description restates the three convertible ID types, which loosely maps to input_type values, but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb (Convert) plus the three exact resource types (DOI, PMID, PMCID), which is unambiguous and clearly distinct from every sibling, none of which perform identifier translation.

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?

It supplies an explicit scope condition – only articles indexed in PubMed Central can be resolved – which tells the agent when the tool will and won't succeed. It does not name exclusions relative to siblings, but no sibling overlaps this capability, so the routing risk is low.

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