fetch_work

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the optional fulltext and prompt parameters, which allow retrieving PDF as markdown or an LLM summary, beyond the basic metadata fetch.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose. Every clause provides essential information without redundancy, making it easy for an agent to quickly understand the tool's capabilities.

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 4 parameters, existing output schema, and annotations, the description covers the main operation and key optional behaviors. It omits detailing 'include_abstract' but the default and schema provide context. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a retrieval tool with good structured support.

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 coverage is 75%, with 3 of 4 parameters described. The description adds meaning for 'fulltext' and 'prompt' by explaining their effects (PDF as markdown, LLM summary). It does not mention 'include_abstract', but the schema default and tool logic imply it, so the description adds value 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 clearly states 'Fetch complete metadata for one work' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by mentioning optional PDF retrieval or LLM summary, which are unique to this tool compared to 'fetch_author' or 'search_works'.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_works' or 'semantic_search_works'. There is no guidance on when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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