Pubmed Lookup Citation

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

Annotations already mark as readOnly and openWorld. Description adds behavioral context: 'deterministic citation matching, more reliable than free-text search', and notes accuracy depends on field completeness. No contradictions.

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, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidelines. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. Highly efficient.

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 complete schema coverage and existence of output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and constraints. No missing critical information for an agent to decide and invoke correctly.

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 is 100% with detailed descriptions. Description reinforces the requirement of at least one bibliographic field and explains the key parameter's auto-assignment, adding clarity beyond the schema.

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 'Look up PubMed IDs from partial bibliographic citations' with specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools by emphasizing deterministic citation matching vs free-text search.

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 states when to use: when you have structured reference details. Contrasts with free-text search, implying when not to use. Also specifies each citation must include at least one bibliographic field, providing clear usage criteria.

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