Get Author Details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only names the return contents. It says nothing about pagination of the papers list, rate limits, auth requirements, or whether a missing author_id errors versus returns empty.

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?

Two short lines, purpose front-loaded, no wasted prose. The bulleted parameter line is slightly awkward formatting for a single-sentence description but costs nothing.

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?

A one-parameter lookup tool is simple enough that a short description can suffice, but with no annotations and no output schema the definition should still say what the profile contains and how the papers list behaves. As written it is adequate but thin.

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% (the property is bare 'type: string'), but the description compensates by specifying this is a 'Semantic Scholar Author ID', which is genuinely more informative than the schema alone. It does not, however, give an ID format or example.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Get author profile and their papers'), so the agent knows this retrieves an author record plus associated papers. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling search_authors, leaving the lookup-by-ID vs search-by-name split implicit.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of the sibling search_authors, which is the natural way to obtain an author_id in the first place. Usage is only inferable from the required parameter.

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