arxiv_search

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

No annotations provided; description only says 'full text extraction' without explaining behavior (e.g., returns abstracts or full text, rate limits, pagination).

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?

Single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. 'Search academic papers on arXiv with full text extraction' is efficient and clear.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema, the description is too minimal. It lacks details on return format, error conditions, or how 'full text extraction' works.

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 0%, but description does not add meaning to parameters. It doesn't explain query format or max_results usage beyond what schema shows.

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 it searches academic papers on arXiv, a specific verb+resource. It also mentions 'full text extraction', distinguishing it from sibling tools like web_search. No ambiguity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like web_search. No context for best use cases or limitations.

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