dblp_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions searching but doesn't describe rate limits, authentication requirements, result format, or whether this is a read-only operation. The description is minimal and lacks important behavioral context.

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 - a single sentence that states the core purpose without any fluff. It's front-loaded with the essential information and wastes no words.

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 that there's an output schema (which presumably describes the return format), the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, for a search tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description is quite minimal and could benefit from more context about the search scope, limitations, or result characteristics.

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%, but the description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's obvious from the parameter names. The description mentions 'search' which aligns with the 'query' parameter, but provides no details about query syntax, result ordering, or what 'max_results' actually controls beyond the obvious.

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 action ('Search') and target resource ('DBLP database for computer science papers'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from the sibling tool 'arxiv_search' which likely searches a different database for similar content.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus the sibling 'arxiv_search' or any other alternatives. The description simply states what it does without context about appropriate use cases or limitations.

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