pubmed_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions returning structured data, but does not describe pagination behavior, rate limits, or what the structured data includes. Schema defaults provide some implicit behavior, but the description adds no explicit context beyond that.

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 concise sentence without fluff, but it lacks essential contextual information. It is not overly verbose, but it also does not effectively use its brevity to convey key details about the tool's capabilities.

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?

For a search tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return structure, how to leverage sorting or date filters, or the significance of response_format and include_abstract parameters.

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?

The schema already provides 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning or usage details beyond what the schema already states.

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 tool searches PubMed and returns structured data for LLM analysis, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not distinguish from siblings like pubmed_quick_search or pubmed_batch_query, so it lacks differentiation.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives no exclusions, prerequisites, or context about its suitability compared to other pubmed_* tools.

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