get_openalex_work

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It explicitly says 'Fetch' indicating a read-only action, and elaborates on accepted ID formats (OpenAlex ID, bare DOI, doi: prefix). This is useful behavioral context beyond the bare schema, though it does not cover error handling or rate limits.

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 two sentences: the first states the tool's purpose, the second details the parameter. Every sentence is necessary, and the structure is front-loaded. No wasted words.

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 a single parameter, a clear purpose, and an existing output schema (which defines return values), the description is complete. It covers the essential what and how without needing extra elaboration.

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 input schema only names 'work_id' with no description, so the schema coverage is 0%. The description compensates fully by explaining the three accepted formats with examples, providing essential meaning for the parameter.

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 'Fetch full OpenAlex metadata for a single work' with a specific verb, resource (OpenAlex), and scope (single work). It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_openalex (searching) and get_crossref_work (Crossref-specific).

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?

Usage is implied: you use this tool when you need full metadata for a specific OpenAlex work. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as when to prefer get_crossref_work or search_openalex.

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