download_paper

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the multi-level cascade behavior, local saving, non-import into Zotero, and the fallback of returning manual download guidance on total failure. It lacks details on partial failure behavior or return format, but key behaviors are transparent.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no redundant information. Every clause adds value.

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 tool has 5 optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers the core workflow and fallback, but lacks critical context such as requiring at least one identifier (DOI/arXiv/URL/OA), the order of the cascade, or the return value on success. This creates ambiguity for an agent deciding how to invoke it.

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 80% (4/5 params have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant parameter semantics beyond the schema; it only mentions DOI/arXiv/OA as sourcing methods, which aligns with params but does not explain how they interact or that at least one is required.

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 the tool downloads PDFs locally via DOI/arXiv/OA links using a multi-level cascade, and explicitly excludes Zotero import. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like import_to_zotero.

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 indicates the tool is for local download without importing into Zotero, which serves as a clear usage boundary. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for import (e.g., import_to_zotero) or discovery (discover_papers), though the exclusion is implicit.

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