zotero_search_items

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

With no annotations, the description conveys that the tool is a read-only search returning item keys, not full details. It notes default scope and the option to extend search. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but for a search tool this is sufficient.

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 sentences, concise and front-loaded with the primary action and key differentiator (qmode). Every sentence adds 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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, output schema present), the description adequately explains the return value (item keys) and ties to other tools. It could be more complete by mentioning the other parameters, but it is still effective.

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%, but the description only explains 'query' and 'qmode' partially. Parameters 'item_type', 'limit', and 'tag' are not described, leaving ambiguity. The description does not fully compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 searches a reference library by keyword, specifying default search fields and an option for full text. It distinguishes from sibling tools like zotero_search_annotations and zotero_get_item_metadata by noting it returns item keys for further use.

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?

Provides clear guidance on default behavior and when to use qmode='everything' for full text searches. It also mentions using the returned keys with other tools. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use conditions or comparisons to all sibling tools.

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