学术论文搜索

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool searches multiple platforms and supports various options. It does not mention rate limits, error handling, caching behavior, authorization requirements, or any side effects. Critical information like automatic query optimization is only in the parameter schema, not in the description.

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 extremely concise—a single sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and key features. There is no fluff, and all information is front-loaded. Every word 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?

Despite an output schema existing (indicated) and rich parameter definitions, the description omits important contextual details such as pagination behavior, cross-platform result merging, data source differences, or any limitations. With 8 parameters and multiple enums, the description should provide more operational context to ensure correct usage.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level summary of capabilities (multi-field, filtering, sorting) but does not provide deeper insight into parameter interactions or constraints beyond what the schema already defines. No additional meaning is added for parameter usage.

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's function: searching papers across multiple academic platforms (arXiv, OpenAlex, etc.) with support for multi-field search, filtering, and sorting. It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('papers'), and the mention of platforms distinguishes it from sibling tools like advanced_search or fetch_paper.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, scenarios where this tool is preferred, or when not to use it. Sibling tools like advanced_search and smart_cache_search exist but no differentiation is given.

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