Search Europe PMC Articles

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies a read-only operation by stating 'Search ... by keyword' but gives no details about result format, pagination limits, rate limits, or any side effects. The pageSize parameter hints at pagination, but that's from the schema, not the description.

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 a single, incomplete sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and resource. It is efficient but could include more detail without becoming verbose.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description need not explain return values. However, with many sibling tools, the lack of usage guidance and missing advanced query syntax details (e.g., boolean operators) leave it slightly incomplete.

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 100%, so the description is not under pressure. The description mentions 'by keyword', aligning with the query parameter, but adds no additional meaning over the schema. The pageSize parameter is not described, but its schema includes a default and description.

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 action ('Search'), the resource ('Europe PMC'), and the content type ('biomedical literature'). It distinguishes the tool by name but lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools like search_clinical_trials or search_chembl_compounds, which also search biomedical databases.

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 is provided on when to use Europe PMC over alternative databases (e.g., for clinical trials or compound data). There are no prerequisites, context, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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