oa_get_author

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

Annotations already declare the operation safe, read-only, and idempotent. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: it returns the unified envelope with a single author item or NOT_FOUND, which helps an agent anticipate the response shape and failure mode.

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 sentences with no filler. The action, identifier types, and expected outcome (single item or NOT_FOUND) are all front-loaded and immediately actionable.

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 one-parameter lookup tool with rich annotations and an output schema present, the description is complete. It covers what the tool takes, what it returns, and the main edge case (NOT_FOUND), with nothing critical missing 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 single author_id parameter is already documented in the schema with an explicit format and example. The tool description restates that OpenAlex IDs or ORCIDs are accepted but adds no new constraints or format details, so it is adequate but not enhancing.

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?

States a specific action ('look up'), a specific resource ('one author'), and the accepted identifier types (OpenAlex ID or ORCID). The singular 'one author' plus the NOT_FOUND outcome clearly distinguishes this from the search-oriented sibling tools.

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 exact-lookup wording makes it clear this tool is for retrieving a single known author rather than searching, and the return of NOT_FOUND reinforces that it is a direct fetch. It does not explicitly name alternatives like oa_search_authors as the fallback for unknown identifiers, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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