search_cnki

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or pagination behavior. The return type is mentioned vaguely as 'JSON format search result list', but no further detail on what fields or limits apply.

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 concise and follows a clear Args/Returns structure. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a 4-parameter tool.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters, 1 required) and the existence of an output schema (so return details less critical), the description covers parameters well. However, it omits contextual prerequisites like the need for authentication (sibling login_cnki exists) and any limitations on usage.

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?

The input schema has 0% parameter descriptions, but the description adds valuable semantic context for all four parameters: keyword, search_type with enumerated options, page_count with range and page size, and sort_by with allowed values. This effectively compensates for the schema gap.

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 CNKI academic papers, with specific verb '搜索' and resource '中国知网 (CNKI) 学术论文'. It distinguishes from sibling search tools like search_wos and search_deepxiv by explicitly naming the CNKI platform.

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 Chinese academic literature via CNKI but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use cues relative to alternatives like search_wos or search_deepxiv. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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