list_semantic_scholar_dataset_releases

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation by using 'list', which is transparent about the non-destructive nature, but it does not explicitly state return behavior beyond 'release IDs' or mention any potential rate limits or formatting details.

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 a single concise sentence that precisely states the tool's function. Every word contributes meaning, with no fluff or repetition. It is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the tool.

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 zero-parameter simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It specifies the primary output (release IDs) and indicates enumeration of all available releases. However, it could slightly benefit from noting that this is a listing operation to precede other dataset tools, but that is a minor enhancement.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially 100% covered. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately avoids padding with irrelevant parameter details. It adds no parameter-specific meaning because there are none to describe.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('Semantic Scholar dataset release IDs'), making it easy to understand. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_semantic_scholar_dataset_release' by indicating it enumerates all available IDs, though it does not explicitly reference these alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context. It simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer that it should be used to obtain release IDs before fetching specific releases.

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