search_documents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently describes the return format (JSON string with fields) and pagination behavior. The tool is clearly read-only with no destructive effects mentioned.

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 concise at three sentences plus a Returns paragraph, well-structured with clear Args/Returns sections. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 description is comprehensive for a search tool with three parameters and an output schema. It covers query syntax, pagination, result fields, and includes an example. No additional context is needed for correct tool invocation.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description is essential. It thoroughly explains all three parameters, including the free-text nature of query, the range and default for results_per_page, and the zero-based page index. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 zbMath Open for mathematical documents using a free-text query. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_document and structured_search by focusing on free-text search.

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 provides clear usage context with parameter details (query, results_per_page, page) and describes pagination. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, which are sufficiently different to imply usage but not explicitly stated.

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