export_to_ris

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait: returns compact RIS with minimal metadata, and explains the rationale (auto-fetch via PMID). It does not mention error handling or rate limits, but for a read-only export tool, this is adequate.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, and the second sentence adds necessary context about the minimal metadata. There is no redundancy or waste.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains the return format (compact RIS) and the reason for it. It lacks explicit error behavior, but that is not critical for the tool's function.

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 schema already provides a description for the only parameter ('List of PubMed IDs (PMIDs)') with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional detail about parameter semantics, so it relies on 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's action ('Export PubMed articles to RIS format') and specifically targets citation managers (EndNote/Zotero/Mendeley). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'fetch' or 'fetch_batch' which retrieve data rather than export to a specific format.

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?

It provides context for when to use the tool (for citation manager exports) and explains that the compact output is sufficient because citation managers auto-fetch via PMID. However, it does not explicitly describe when not to use it or mention alternative tools for full metadata retrieval.

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