discover-papers

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

The description adds a behavioral detail—output renders as a browsable grid—beyond the basic search action. However, without annotations, it doesn't disclose potential API limitations or explicitly state that it's a read-only operation, though search implies this.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word contributes 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?

For a simple search tool with two parameters and a clear output description, the description is adequately complete. It explains the data source and output format. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no mention of sorting or API rate limits), but the schema covers default limit.

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 100%, so both parameters (topic, limit) are already well-documented. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 (search), resource (arXiv library), and output (matching paper cards rendered as a grid). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like save-paper or summarize-paper by focusing on discovery.

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 context: use this tool when you need to search for papers by topic. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is straightforward and the sibling tools have different functions.

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