zotero_search

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive traits. The description adds meaningful context by specifying that the tool resolves local PDF attachment paths, which is not evident from annotations alone. However, it does not disclose additional behaviors like sorting or 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's core purpose. No wasted words; every phrase earns its place.

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 tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, output schema present, multiple siblings), the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It does not mention default values (e.g., item_type defaults to '-attachment') or the scope of search results, though the output schema may fill some gaps. It would benefit from brief guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives.

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 only 33% (only 'query' has a description). The description does not compensate by explaining 'limit' or 'item_type' semantics. It provides no parameter-level guidance beyond the overall search context, leaving two of three parameters effectively undocumented.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and identifies the resource ('Zotero items'), with an additional function ('resolve local PDF attachment paths'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like zotero_match or zotero_item by emphasizing the search capability and PDF path resolution.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as zotero_match or zotero_item. It implies a general search use case but does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or when an alternative is more appropriate.

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