Pubmed Fetch Articles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the return fields (abstract, authors, journal, MeSH terms). It does not disclose rate limits or error behavior, but given annotations, the added context is valuable.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and output, with no unnecessary words.

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?

The tool has an output schema (reducing need to explain return format), and the description lists key return fields. Parameter count is low, and annotations cover safety. The description is sufficient for a fetch tool.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents parameters. The description mentions MeSH terms, which relates to the includeMesh parameter, but does not add semantics beyond the schema's descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses specific verb 'fetch' and resource 'full article metadata', listing included fields (abstract, authors, journal, MeSH terms). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like pubmed_search_articles (search) and pubmed_fetch_fulltext (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?

The description implies use when you have PubMed IDs and want metadata, but it does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. No guidance on when-not-to-use is provided.

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