kci_article

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

No annotations are provided, but the description faithfully conveys the core behavior: a read-only retrieval of a full record, with no mutation implied. It adds meaningful context about scope and exclusivity, though it does not discuss error behavior or access prerequisites. The output schema covers return structure.

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?

Two tight sentences lead with the core definition and immediately add differentiating value. Every phrase contributes — no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 single-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it states what the tool returns, why it is unique, and when to use it. Minor omissions like invalid-ID behavior are acceptable given the simple shape and existing output schema.

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%, yet the description compensates by explaining article_id as a control number and giving a realistic example (ART001995054). That gives an agent enough to construct a valid call despite the sparse 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?

Clearly identifies a specific resource — the full KCI record for one control number — with a concrete example. It also distinguishes itself from sibling kci_search by naming the unique fields it carries (author keywords, ISSN, affiliations, abstracts).

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 tells the agent when to use this endpoint: to repair incomplete records returned by kci_search. The phrase 'the only endpoint that carries...' also communicates why it is the correct choice over sibling tools.

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