Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• search_pubmedA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It effectively describes the search behavior, field logic, and return format, though it lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is well-structured with clear sections (Parameters, Field logic, Returns) and avoids redundancy. It could be slightly more concise by integrating some details, but overall it's efficient and front-loaded.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a 5-parameter search tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is quite complete—covering parameters, logic, and return values. Minor gaps include lack of error handling or performance details, but it's largely sufficient.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters5/5

  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 thoroughly explains all 5 parameters, including their purposes, defaults, and interactions (e.g., field logic for title/abstract/keywords), adding significant value beyond the bare schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the specific action ('Search PubMed') and resource ('article JSON objects'), with no siblings to distinguish from. It provides a complete picture of what the tool does.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for searching PubMed articles but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or error conditions. With no sibling tools, this is less critical but still a gap.

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