get_doi_metrics

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

No annotations provided; the description only outlines the action but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether counts are real-time. For a read operation, minimal guidance is given.

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?

Single sentence with clear front-loading of purpose. No redundant information; every word contributes.

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 no output schema, the description omits return format and error conditions. It covers the core action but lacks completeness for an agent to fully understand the response structure.

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 description adds meaning for include_time_series by mentioning 'monthly time-series arrays', but does not clarify the doi parameter beyond the name. With 0% schema coverage, it partially compensates.

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 it retrieves view, download, and citation counts for a DOI, with optional time-series. This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like get_doi (metadata) and get_related_works.

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like get_doi or search_dois. The description implies usage for metrics but lacks exclusions or context.

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