retrieve_author_works_tool

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

The description discloses that results are chronologically sorted, providing some behavioral context. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on side effects, authentication, rate limits, or return structure beyond the sorting.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no fluff. The first sentence states the core action, the second gives a practical example.

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?

The description is sufficient for a simple retrieval tool given the existence of an output schema. It covers purpose, sorting, and input format. Slightly more detail on when to use would improve completeness.

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 description explains the author_id format via example but does not address the 'limit' parameter at all. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description should compensate but fails to explain what limit controls or how to use it.

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 retrieves chronologically sorted publications for an OpenAlex author ID. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from siblings like search_authors_tool or get_author_profile_scopus_tool.

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 via an example input but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or any prerequisites. There is no guidance on when not to use it.

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