get_cached

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds that the tool looks up cached downloads and returns preferred local files, but does not elaborate on what 'preferred' means, potential file formats, or if multiple files are returned. Beyond annotations, the description offers minimal additional behavioral insight.

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, concise sentence that states the purpose and outcome without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and every word contributes meaning.

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's simplicity (2 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the main purpose but misses explaining the 'download_dir' parameter and the nature of 'preferred local files'. The existence of an output schema partially compensates for return value details, but the incomplete parameter information leaves a gap.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It clarifies 'doi' implicitly through the tool's purpose, but the optional 'download_dir' parameter is not explained at all. The parameter names alone hint at functionality, but the description adds no additional semantic value beyond what can be inferred from the input 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 uses a specific verb ('Look up'), identifies the resource ('cached downloads for a DOI'), and states the result ('return preferred local files'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'list_cached' (which lists all cached items) and 'fetch_paper' (which retrieves from source).

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 cached files for a DOI), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_cached' or 'fetch_paper'. No when-not or prerequisite information is provided.

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