pubmed_endnote_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behaviors. It only suggests a read-only 'get' operation, but the schema includes 'clean' and 'clear' actions, which are mutating/destructive. The description fails to disclose these side effects, potentially misleading the agent.

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 a single short sentence without fluff, but it is under-specified. It lacks any mention of the action parameter or the tool's broader capabilities, so brevity comes at the cost of completeness.

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?

The tool has one parameter with four actions, no annotations, and no output schema. The description covers only the 'stats' aspect and omits the other actions, leaving the agent without enough information to correctly invoke the tool for 'list', 'clean', or 'clear'. It is incomplete and could lead to misuse.

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% (the 'action' param has a description), so baseline is 3. However, the description adds no meaning about the parameter or its enum values ('stats', 'list', 'clean', 'clear'), which are not self-explanatory. The parameter description '操作类型' is generic, and the tool description fails to explain what each action does.

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 states '获取EndNote导出状态和统计信息' (Get EndNote export status and statistics), which is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from search tools. However, it only mentions the 'stats' aspect and omits the 'list', 'clean', and 'clear' actions defined in the schema, making the purpose appear narrower than actual.

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 given on when to use this tool compared to siblings like pubmed_fulltext_status or pubmed_cache_info. The description provides no context, exclusions, or alternatives.

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