search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It details output modes and exactly what each returns (minimal/compact/full), which goes beyond the schema. It does not mention rate limits or error handling, but for a search tool this is substantial behavioral disclosure.

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 dense but not overly long. It front-loads purpose and then explains output modes efficiently in one sentence. No wasted words, though the construction is a bit run-on.

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 6 params, nested filters, and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: purpose, output behavior, and mentions pagination/filters. It lacks comprehensive return value documentation but the output mode explanation partially fills that gap.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds significant meaning to output_mode by breaking down exactly which fields each mode includes, which is not in the schema. Other parameters are adequately described in 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 it searches PubMed with MeSH support, filters, pagination, and selectable output verbosity. The verb and resource are specific, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like count or find_similar_articles.

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 one needs to search PubMed, but provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or exclusions. No mention of when to choose this tool over count/find_similar_articles.

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