Pubmed Lookup Citation

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

Description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: deterministic citation matching, ECitMatch primary-key behavior (journal+volume+page), and explanation of failure conditions. No contradictions with readOnlyHint or openWorldHint.

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 focused sentences: purpose first, then usage guidelines. No unnecessary words, earns its place.

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 output schema exists, description covers all necessary context: constraints, best practices, and comparison to alternatives. Complete for a batch citation lookup 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?

Schema coverage 100% with descriptions; description adds extra context like 'more fields = better accuracy' and 'key auto-assigned if omitted', which enhances schema meaning.

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 'Look up PubMed IDs from partial bibliographic citations' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like pubmed_search_articles (free-text search) and pubmed_convert_ids (ID conversion).

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?

Explicitly says when to use (structured references needing PMID) and contrasts with free-text search (more reliable for structured references). Also provides constraints: must include at least journal or year; author-only or volume-only guarantees no match.

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