semantic_search

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

The description adds the important behavioral constraint that it only searches the local downloaded collection, which goes beyond the annotations' readOnlyHint. It also mentions the pro dependency requirement. However, it does not detail behavior for edge cases like providing both query and paper_id, or the output format.

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 very concise, with two sentences that front-load the core functionality and then provide usage guidance. Every sentence adds necessary information, with 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?

The description covers the tool's scope and prerequisites well. However, it lacks information about the output format (e.g., what fields are returned). Given that there is no output schema, the description could be more complete by mentioning the expected return 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds value by providing examples for query ('attention mechanisms for long sequences') and clarifying the purpose of paper_id (finding similar papers). This enriches the semantic understanding beyond the schema.

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 performs semantic similarity search over locally downloaded papers, distinguishing it from search_papers (which searches arXiv). It provides specific use cases (free-text queries or similar to paper_id), making the purpose very clear.

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 description explicitly advises when to use this tool: only after downloading papers via download_paper. It warns about empty results if no papers are downloaded and directs the user to use search_papers first. It also mentions pro dependencies, providing comprehensive usage guidance.

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