download_papers

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions deduplication of DOIs, writing scipdf-manifest.json, and returning indexed results. However, it omits details like error handling, overwrite behavior, concurrency, or authentication requirements. The disclosure is moderate but not exhaustive.

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 with three sentences, each adding value. It front-loads the purpose ('Batch-download papers'), then details input requirements, and finally lists key behaviors. No redundant or extraneous information.

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 five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the purpose of 'force' or 'outdir', default behaviors, or handling of errors. An agent would need to infer or experiment with missing details, making it insufficient for reliable invocation.

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 60%, covering three of five parameters. The description adds context for the 'queries' parameter by listing accepted input types, but does not explain 'force' or 'outdir'. It provides marginal additional value beyond the schema for the covered parameters.

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 explicitly states 'Batch-download papers' and lists specific input types (DOIs, titles, URLs, bibliography blobs). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'download_paper' by emphasizing batch operation. The verb 'download' and resource 'papers' are clear and specific.

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 use for batch downloading via 'Batch-download' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'download_paper' for single papers or other siblings. No when-not-to-use guidance or prerequisites provided.

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