find_best_match

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions 'quickly find' but does not describe how matching works, what happens if no match is found, or any other behavioral traits.

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?

A single sentence that is to the point, but it lacks structure and could include more context without becoming verbose.

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?

With a simple input (one parameter) and an existing output schema (not shown), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not clarify what 'best match' means or what the output represents.

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 coverage is 100% with the parameter 'query' described as '论文标题' (paper title). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('find') and the specific resource ('CNKI paper') with the qualifier 'best match', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_cnki that likely return multiple results.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The purpose implies it is for finding a single best-matching paper given a title, but it does not mention alternatives or exclusions.

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