fetch_institution

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

The description adds the term 'full' implying complete data, but does not detail what fields are returned or any side effects. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description provides minimal extra behavioral context. It is adequate but not enriched beyond the structured data.

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 conveys the purpose efficiently. There is no redundant information, and every word is meaningful.

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 (one parameter, output schema present, read-only annotation), the description is minimally sufficient. However, it lacks details on error handling (e.g., what happens if the ID is invalid) and does not mention the output structure, relying solely on the output schema. This is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 covers the single parameter 'institution_id' with a description indicating acceptable ID formats (OpenAlex, ROR, MAG, Wikidata). With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no further meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Fetch full institution profile', which uses a specific verb ('fetch') and identifies the resource ('institution profile'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'fetch_author' and 'fetch_work', which operate on different resources.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that 'fetch_institution' is for retrieving a known institution by ID, while 'search_institutions' is for finding institutions by query. The agent is left to infer usage from context.

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