collect

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool collects papers and optionally creates notes, but does not mention side effects (e.g., duplicate handling), error handling, or whether it modifies existing data. This is adequate but lacks detail.

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 concise: two short paragraphs with front-loaded purpose and important notes. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage context, and parameter semantics adequately given the tool's simplicity (2 params, output schema exists). It could improve by differentiating from the sibling tool and discussing edge cases, but is largely complete.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, explaining obsidian_mode options and paper_indices format. The description reinforces this but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 states the tool collects pushed papers to Zotero and optionally creates Obsidian notes, providing a clear verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'collect_to_zotero', leaving ambiguity about when to use each.

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 explicitly says to use after finalize_review and warns against calling the Zotero API directly. It explains the index format (1-based, from latest push). However, it does not specify when to prefer this tool over the sibling 'collect_to_zotero'.

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