Export an INSPIRE literature record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true and openWorldHint: true, covering the safety profile. The description adds that it produces citation formats, which is useful, but it does not disclose error behavior, prerequisites, or output structure beyond what the output schema likely provides. It is consistent with annotations and adds minimal extra context.

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, front-loaded sentence: 'Export one paper in an INSPIRE-supported citation format.' It contains no filler and efficiently conveys the core function.

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 simple export tool, the description captures the primary action, and annotations provide safety, while the schema covers parameter options. However, missing usage guidance and parameter semantics leave the description incomplete for nuanced decisions like choosing this over generate_bibliography. It is minimally complete but has clear gaps.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the four parameters. The phrase 'citation format' vaguely maps to the format parameter, but identifier_type, detail, and identifier are left undefined. This fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Export one paper' with a specific verb and resource, and 'INSPIRE-supported citation format' distinguishes it from siblings like get_literature (metadata retrieval) and generate_bibliography (likely multi-paper export). This is a precise and unique purpose.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only says 'one paper', implying single-record use, but does not mention when to prefer get_literature or generate_bibliography. No exclusions or alternative tool names are given.

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