search_medrxiv

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the search is limited by category and within the last 30 days, which is critical behavioral information. It could additionally mention pagination or rate limits, but the core behavior is well covered.

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 concise: a short purpose sentence, a key limitation note, and structured Args/Returns sections. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 (2 params, 1 required, output schema present), the description covers purpose, behavior, parameter usage, and return type adequately. It could slightly improve by mentioning that results are limited to the last 30 days or details about the output format, but it is sufficient.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for parameters. The description compensates by explaining the 'query' parameter with concrete examples (like 'infectious_diseases') and restates the default for 'max_results'. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema.

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 'Search academic papers from medRxiv' and explains the specific limitation that the API filters by category name within the last 30 days, not full-text keyword search. This differentiates it from other search_ tools that may support full-text search.

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 explicitly notes the API's behavior (category filter, 30-day window) and provides example category keywords, indicating when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly guide users away from using it for full-text search or suggest alternative tools.

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