zotero_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently states that the search performs full-field matching, returns only top-level items, and excludes attachments. This gives the agent important behavioral context beyond a simple 'search' verb, though it does not mention pagination or result ordering.

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 short and front-loads the core purpose, but it duplicates the same information in Chinese and English, creating redundancy. The final sentence adds useful workflow guidance, but a more compact single-language description would be 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 covers the main behavior and downstream workflow, and an output schema exists to document return values. However, it omits parameter-level detail for tag and limit, and does not address pagination behavior or any limits on result size, leaving some gaps for an agent trying to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only covers the query parameter indirectly through 'keyword search'. The tag and limit parameters are not described at all, leaving their exact semantics to inference from their names and defaults. This is a notable gap for a tool with three parameters.

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 performs a keyword search across the library with full-field matching (title/author/year), and specifies that only top-level items are returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like zotero_item and zotero_recent by emphasizing the search scope and attachment exclusion.

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 clear downstream routing: after obtaining a key, use zotero_item for details or zotero_bibtex for citations. It also states that attachments are excluded, which helps an agent decide when this tool is appropriate, though it does not explicitly list when-not-to-use alternatives.

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