semantic_search

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

The annotations already establish read-only and local-only behavior, and the description adds important operational context beyond them: empty results when no papers are downloaded, plus the required pro dependency installation command. This is valuable behavioral information for an agent deciding whether the tool is available and what preconditions apply.

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 efficient and front-loaded. It leads with the core scope, then the important failure condition, then the prerequisite workflow, and finally the installation dependency. Each sentence adds genuine information without filler.

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 read-only search tool with no required parameters and only three well-documented schema properties, this description covers the critical information: preconditions, empty-result behavior, supported query modes, and the needed setup command. No output schema is present, but return-value shape is not a blocker for correct invocation.

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 schema already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage, so the description is not required to explain them. It adds value by giving a concrete free-text example and clarifying that query and paper_id are the two supported semantic-search modes.

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?

Clearly states a specific operation — semantic similarity search — and scopes it to papers already downloaded locally via download_paper. It identifies two query modes (free-text or paper_id) and is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like search_papers and search_paper_text.

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?

Explicitly explains when the tool returns empty results, recommends search_papers to discover arXiv papers, then download_paper to add them to the local index before semantic_search. This gives the agent a clear workflow and names the alternative tool.

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