创建中传SCI检索运行

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

The description discloses 'recoverable' behavior, the absence of online retrieval, and a worksheet prohibition. However, with all annotations false, the description carries full burden, and it lacks details on side effects, state persistence, or interaction with other system components like browser sessions.

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 two sentences, direct, and without fluff. It front-loads the primary purpose and adds a key constraint, achieving high information density in minimal text.

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?

This is a complex 8-parameter tool with no schema descriptions and no annotations. The description covers only the high-level purpose and one parameter constraint, leaving major gaps in parameter understanding and usage context. It is far from adequate for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description only addresses target_sheet (prohibiting 'Sheet1'). It does not explain topics, years, institution, pdf_directory, tencent_doc_url, or accept_preprints. The WOS query mention implies some parameters are search criteria, but explicit semantics are missing.

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 tool creates a recoverable local run record and generates a WOS advanced search query, and explicitly notes it does not perform online retrieval. This specific verb+resource description distinguishes it from sibling search_wos, which likely executes the actual 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 phrase '不执行联网检索' (does not perform online retrieval) implies use for preparation rather than actual searching, but no explicit when/when-not conditions or alternative tools are named. The target worksheet restriction is a constraint, not usage guidance.

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