openalex_search_sources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It states it searches and returns data, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or sorting. The description adds moderate context beyond the name.

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?

Two sentences with no redundancy: first sentence defines purpose and output, second provides a practical usage hint. Every sentence 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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists key return fields and provides a usage tip. However, it is incomplete regarding parameter details and does not describe the structure of results (e.g., pagination info). Still, for a search tool, it covers the most critical context.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the five parameters (query, filters, is_oa, per_page, source_type). The agent must infer functionality from parameter names alone, which is insufficient.

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?

Description clearly states the verb (Search), resource (journals, conference proceedings, etc.), and lists specific return fields (ISSN, publisher, open-access status, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that search works, authors, or institutions.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on using the returned 'openalex_id' in work filters, which is a direct usage hint. However, it does not contrast with alternatives like openalex_get_source for when to search versus retrieve a specific source.

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