search_dblp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only mentions returns and defaults, but lacks details on API behavior, rate limits, authentication, sorting, or result structure beyond 'dictionary format.'

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 extremely concise: three short sentences plus an Args/Returns block. Every sentence adds value, and the purpose is front-loaded. No superfluous content.

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?

With two simple parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core functionality but lacks guidance on return fields (though schema likely covers that) and usage context. Given the sibling set, more context would help.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'query' with an example and 'max_results' with its default, adding value beyond the schema's type and title. However, it could elaborate on query syntax or limits.

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 verb 'Search' and the specific resource 'dblp computer science bibliography.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_arxiv or search_pubmed, which target different 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?

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given many search_* siblings for different sources, the agent would need explicit criteria for choosing dblp, which is missing.

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