Save a PubMed and preprint query snapshot, then retrieve only papers published since the prior snapshot to track new drug, keyword, or affiliation research.
Snapshot a paper query (PubMed + optional preprints) and return papers new since the previous snapshot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| drug | No | ||
| name | Yes | ||
| since | No | ||
| keyword | No | ||
| affiliation | No | ||
| preprint_days | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a snapshot operation returning new results since a prior snapshot and that preprints may be included, but it does not explain snapshot persistence, naming behavior, permission requirements, or what happens when no prior snapshot exists.
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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the core action and return semantics efficiently.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, six parameters, and zero schema description coverage, the definition is too sparse. It omits key operational details such as snapshot storage/naming semantics and the meaning of most parameters, leaving the agent under-equipped 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% across six parameters, so the description must compensate substantially. It vaguely references a paper query and optional preprints but does not explain the required 'name' parameter, the meaning of 'since', how drug/keyword/affiliation filters work, or what 'preprint_days' controls.
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 states a specific verb and resource ('Snapshot a paper query') and clarifies the sources and return behavior ('PubMed + optional preprints', 'papers new since the previous snapshot'). It is clear enough to distinguish this from a plain paper search, though it does not explicitly name the sibling alternatives.
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 mention of returning papers 'new since the previous snapshot' implies a recurring monitoring workflow, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus search_papers or paper_changes_since. The intended usage is inferable rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.