pubmed-mcp-server

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true (safe) and openWorldHint=true (external dependency). Description adds valuable return payload context ('abstract, authors, journal, MeSH terms') but omits behavioral details expected for open-world tools: rate limits, handling of invalid PMIDs, or data freshness. No contradiction with annotations.

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 zero waste: first establishes action and key input, second specifies return value. Front-loaded with critical information and appropriately scoped for the tool's complexity.

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?

Adequate for a fetch tool with complete input schema and existing output schema. Description correctly focuses on high-level purpose rather than re-documenting schema fields. Minor gap regarding batch processing implications or error states for the 200-item limit.

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 has 100% description coverage, establishing baseline 3. Description mentions 'MeSH terms' which loosely maps to includeMesh parameter, but does not explicitly clarify the toggle behavior of includeMesh/includeGrants or the 200-item limit in pmids array.

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?

Clear specific verb ('Fetch') + resource ('article metadata') + identifier ('by PubMed IDs'). Effectively distinguishes from sibling 'pubmed_search_articles' (query-based discovery vs. ID-based retrieval) and 'pubmed_fetch_fulltext' (metadata vs. full text).

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?

Implies prerequisite by stating 'by PubMed IDs,' suggesting users need IDs beforehand. However, lacks explicit guidance on obtaining IDs (e.g., 'use pubmed_search_articles first if you lack IDs') or when to prefer this over fetch_fulltext for abstract-only needs.

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