get_paper_content

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

No annotations are provided, so description must disclose behavior. It mentions 'downloading and converting if necessary', which hints at side effects but lacks detail about conversion format, error scenarios, or performance impact. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and key behavioral aspect. 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?

Given one parameter and no output schema, the description explains the main action but does not specify the return format (e.g., text, PDF) or any additional details about the content. The mention of download/conversion is helpful, but gaps remain.

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% and description of paper_id in schema is sufficient. The description adds no extra information about parameters, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 action ('Get the full content of a paper') and the resource ('paper'), distinguishing it from siblings like list_papers (metadata) and search_papers (search). The additional context 'downloading and converting it if necessary' clarifies the scope.

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 implies usage when full content is needed, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or direct comparison with siblings. The context from sibling names makes it clear, but no exclusions are stated.

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