pubmed_fulltext_status

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

The description says 'get' (获取), which suggests read-only behavior, but the schema includes 'clean' and 'clear' actions that are destructive. With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and fails to disclose these mutating operations, actively misleading users about the tool's capabilities.

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, which is concise, but it omits critical information about the action parameter and destructive operations. It is under-specified rather than efficiently complete, so it does not fully earn its place.

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 lacks annotations and an output schema, and the description only covers a narrow 'get status' aspect. It does not explain the 'list', 'clean', or 'clear' behaviors, potential side effects, or return values, making it severely incomplete for a multi-action tool with destructive options.

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 100%, and both parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter context (e.g., behavior of 'clean' vs 'clear'), so it does not improve on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it gets full-text cache status and statistics, which gives a basic verb+resource. However, it does not mention the 'list', 'clean', or 'clear' actions available in the schema, so the full scope of tool operations is unclear. It also does not differentiate from sibling tools like pubmed_cache_info.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites, and no context for which action to choose. The description implies a read-only status check, but the schema shows additional actions without any usage direction.

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