Search Arxiv

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'search... in real time' and does not mention API behavior, rate limits, result format, pagination, or read-only status. 'Real time' adds one trait, but it is insufficient for a networked search tool.

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 one front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a relatively simple tool, even though it could convey more behavioral context.

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 tool is simple, the output schema covers return information, and the input schema has full parameter coverage. The single-sentence description is minimally adequate, but the lack of annotations and usage guidance leaves the agent to infer when to select this tool and what behavioral expectations apply.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which makes the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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: 'Search papers on arXiv in real time.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_paper_details or find_code_repositories at a glance. It does not explicitly describe the returned content, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus the sibling tools, nor are there exclusions or prerequisites. The role of this tool as the search/discovery entry point is implied by its name rather than stated.

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