IEEE Xplore MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While it mentions being a 'convenience wrapper,' it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination behavior beyond parameters, error conditions, or what format results return. For a search tool with 8 parameters and no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 concise sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place: first sentence states what it does, second sentence clarifies its relationship to sibling tool and primary parameter. No wasted words or redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but has clear gaps. It explains the purpose and relationship to alternatives well, but doesn't address behavioral aspects like result format, limitations, or error handling that would be important for an agent to use it effectively.

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 schema already documents all 8 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only mentioning 'publication_title as the primary filter' which is already clear from the required parameter and schema description. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool searches IEEE Xplore for papers in a specific publication, distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_papers (general search) and search_by_author (author-focused). It specifies 'journal/conference' scope and mentions it's a convenience wrapper with publication_title as primary filter.

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 this tool ('Search IEEE Xplore for papers in a specific publication') and provides clear alternatives ('Convenience wrapper around search_papers with publication_title as the primary filter'), distinguishing it from the more general search_papers tool.

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