get_authors

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose two useful traits: the operation is batched and capped at 1000 IDs. However, it says nothing about handling of missing or invalid IDs, result ordering, rate limits, or authentication, leaving significant behavior unspecified.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the batch limit is placed prominently and every word contributes. It is concise without being empty.

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?

Insufficient for a tool with no annotations and no per-parameter documentation. The output schema may cover return shape, but the agent still lacks when-to-use guidance, understanding of the fields parameter, and failure behavior expectations.

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 does not: 'author IDs' only restates the author_ids property, and the optional fields parameter is completely unexplained even though it likely controls which author attributes are returned.

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 supplies a specific verb ('Batch-get'), a resource (Semantic Scholar authors), and a batch-size limit (1000), so the core operation is clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_author or search_authors, and 'author IDs' is slightly ambiguous as to whether IDs are the input or the returned objects.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus get_author (single author) or search_authors (find authors by query). 'Batch' hints at multiple IDs, but no explicit conditions, preconditions, or alternatives are stated.

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