configure_library_provider

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that Mendeley uses BibTeX export and provides source URLs for Zotero credentials. It does not detail side effects like overwriting existing config or error handling, but the core behavior is clear.

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 and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a usage sentence, then parameter details in an easy-to-scan bullet style. 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 presence of an output schema (not detailed), the description covers essential aspects: purpose, when to use, and parameter semantics. It lacks mention of return values or failure scenarios, but for a configuration tool, this is adequate.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: provider options ('zotero' or 'mendeley'), api_key and user_id for Zotero, bibtex_path for Mendeley. It adds valuable meaning beyond the bare 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 the tool's purpose: 'Configure the library provider for this Metis installation.' It uses a specific verb (configure) and resource (library provider), and distinguishes from siblings like sync_zotero_library and import_bibtex_library by emphasizing setup and switching.

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 says 'Call this during setup or when switching reference managers,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, which would improve guidance.

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