search_doaj

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the return format as a list of paper metadata in dictionary format and mentions the default max_results. However, it lacks disclosure of potential limitations, rate limits, error handling, or pagination behavior.

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 extremely concise, using two brief sentences plus a structured Args/Returns section. Every word serves a purpose, and the format is easy to parse.

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 presence of an output schema (context indicates has output schema=true), the description does not need to detail return format. It covers the essential purpose, parameters, and basic behavior. However, it does not differentiate from numerous sibling search tools for other databases, which could be improved.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'query' is a search query string (with example 'machine learning') and that 'max_results' is the maximum number of papers (with default value). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's type and default fields.

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 'Search academic papers from DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)', specifying the verb 'search' and the resource 'academic papers from DOAJ'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like download_doaj and read_doaj_paper.

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 searching DOAJ papers but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_papers or search_arxiv). No when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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