Search scientific papers

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds no behavioral context beyond 'search by keyword,' such as rate limits, pagination behavior, or billing details (which are in param descriptions but not the main description). Minimal additional value.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. However, it is very brief and could be structured to front-load key information like what the tool does, but it does so adequately.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, parameter richness, and presence of output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the core function and leaves return value details to the 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 descriptions cover all parameters (100%). The description adds valuable usage hints beyond schema: 'Short, concise queries are best. English language only. Don't include years or filters...' This aids correct parameter use.

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?

Description clearly states the verb (Search), resource (BGPT's database of scientific papers), and method (by keyword). It distinguishes from sibling lookup_paper which is likely a direct lookup by ID.

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 on when to use this tool versus lookup_paper. The description implies use for keyword search, but does not state when not to use it or provide alternatives. Usage is implied but not clearly delineated.

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