download_semantic

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden, disclosing it is open-access only, may not have PDF, and explaining the paper_id prefix formats. It also notes return type ('Path to downloaded PDF, or error').

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?

Well-structured with priority list, parameter descriptions, and return info. Slightly verbose with 'DOWNLOAD PRIORITY' header but each sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, description explains return value and error case. Covers complexity with ID formats and priority logic adequately.

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 0%, so description compensates by explaining paper_id format (prefixed options like DOI, ARXIV, PMID) and save_path as directory. However, save_path could clarify if optional or required.

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 it downloads PDFs via Semantic Scholar, specifies open-access only, and positions it as a last resort. It distinguishes from siblings by providing a prioritized download order with specific tool names.

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 explicitly provides a download priority list with alternatives (download_arxiv, download_scihub) and explains when to use this tool as last resort. This is comprehensive guidance.

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