search_literature

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

Describes the return format (markdown table) and possible errors (missing table/column). No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It is transparent about being a read operation and covers edge cases, though it does not explicitly state that it does not modify data.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections for purpose, usage distinctions, parameter details, and return format. Each sentence adds value; no 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 no annotations and presence of output schema, the description covers input, output, error handling, and use cases. Provides all necessary context for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains all three parameters: query as case-insensitive substring, field as column with named options, limit with default 20. Adds significant meaning beyond the raw 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?

States clearly that it searches the user's literature database by structured facets (disease, method, geography, keyword). Distinguishes from sibling tools like search_library, search_fulltext, and search_pdf_knowledge by specifying their different scopes.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (curated/seeded literature) and when to use alternatives (Zotero references use search_library, PDF body text use search_fulltext, semantic RAG use search_pdf_knowledge). Provides clear decision context.

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