Pubmed Fetch Articles

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by listing returned fields (abstract, authors, journal, MeSH terms), but does not disclose additional behavioral aspects such as rate limits, authentication needs, or pagination behavior. It does not contradict 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?

The description is a single sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 low complexity (3 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the essential functionality and return information. No critical gaps are present.

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 100%, so the parameters are well-documented. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely mentions some return fields that relate to the includeMesh parameter but does not elaborate on parameter semantics.

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 clearly states the action ('Fetch full article metadata by PubMed IDs') and lists specific content returned (abstract, authors, journal, MeSH terms). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pubmed_fetch_fulltext (which retrieves full text) and pubmed_format_citations (which formats citations).

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 description implies usage for fetching metadata when you have PubMed IDs, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like pubmed_fetch_fulltext or pubmed_lookup_citation. No exclusion criteria or alternative references are provided.

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