search_semanticscholar

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully states that it uses a public Graph API and lists the returned fields, but it omits important traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination behavior, and whether the operation is read-only.

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 concise sentences that front-load the purpose and then detail the return format. Every sentence earns its place, though it could be slightly tighter.

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?

The description helpfully explains return values, which is important because there is no output schema. However, it omits any parameter guidance and usage context, making it adequate but incomplete for a four-parameter search tool.

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%, and the description does not mention any of the four parameters (query, limit, year_from, year_to). Since the schema lacks parameter descriptions, the description fails to compensate, leaving parameter meanings entirely undocumented.

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 specific verb (Search) and resource (Semantic Scholar via its public Graph API), even naming the endpoint (paper/search). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like search_crossref or search_arxiv, so an agent must infer when to choose this one.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions or prerequisites. The description merely states what the tool does, leaving usage context implicit at best.

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