Download Papers Batch

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 usefully discloses the cache-skip behavior, but says nothing about what happens on partial failures, that downloads may trigger verification (a concern the schema hints at), or what auth/session state is required.

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?

A single compact sentence with the batch capability front-loaded and the cache behavior as a secondary clause. No filler, nothing to cut.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the three parameters are fully documented in the schema. However, for a networked batch download that can hit verification walls and requires a session, the description omits failure and auth context that an agent would need to plan around.

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%, so all three parameters including concurrency limits and the verification caveat are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the cache-skip rule, adding nothing beyond structured data; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('批量下载 PDF') plus batch scope ('一次调用完成多篇'), which implicitly separates it from the single-file sibling download_paper_pdf. It never names the sibling explicitly, so differentiation relies on the word '批量'.

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?

Usage is implied by '一次调用完成多篇' — use this when you have multiple papers. There is no explicit when-not guidance (e.g., use download_paper_pdf for a single paper) and no prerequisites such as login state mentioned, despite siblings like get_login_status and open_verification_window.

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