get_citation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the return type (CitationResponse) but does not mention potential errors, accepted format values beyond examples, or any read-only guarantees. The behavioral scope is minimally covered but lacks depth.

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 concise docstring with a clear one-sentence purpose, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. It contains no fluff and efficiently communicates essential information.

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 simple two-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return type. It lacks details on error handling or a definite list of supported formats ('etc.' is vague), but overall it is reasonably complete given the tool's simplicity and lack of an output schema.

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?

The description explicitly explains both parameters: record_id as 'The ID of the Zenodo record' and format as 'The citation format (bibtex, apa, etc.)'. Since the schema only provides field names and defaults, the description adds meaningful examples and clarifies the expected semantics, compensating for the 0% schema coverage.

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 'Get a citation for a Zenodo record in the specified format.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('citation for a Zenodo record') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_records and get_metadata by focusing on citation generation.

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 implies usage when a citation is needed for a Zenodo record, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, such as using get_metadata for record details instead of a formatted citation.

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