get_paper

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get' and gives no information about read-only behavior, external identifier resolution, authentication/rate limits, or failure modes.

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 efficient sentence with no filler, and the key scoping information—one paper, by identifier—is front-loaded. Every word contributes to the agent's understanding.

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?

Since an output schema exists, the return shape does not need to be explained, and the description is adequate for a simple lookup. Still, the fields parameter is left unexplained and there is no guidance on which sibling tools to use for search or batch retrieval, leaving gaps in the full calling context.

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 adds useful meaning to paper_id by explaining that it accepts either a Semantic Scholar ID or a supported external identifier, which the schema alone does not convey. However, the optional fields parameter is not mentioned at all, and with 0% schema description coverage the description should compensate more fully.

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 a direct fetch of a single paper, keyed by Semantic Scholar ID or supported external identifier. The singular 'one paper' and identifier-based lookup distinguish it from search_papers, but it never explicitly names sibling tools such as get_papers.

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 the tool should be used when an identifier is already known, but it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or when to prefer search_papers/get_papers. This is usable guidance but left mostly to inference.

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