search_authors_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It mentions search and return of data, but does not disclose behavior such as pagination, rate limits, or read-only nature. For a search tool, more behavioral context is needed.

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: two sentences with no redundant words. Front-loaded with the action and key return fields.

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 the complexity (3 parameters, output schema exists, many sibling tools), the description provides the essential purpose and return values. However, it lacks details on sorting, pagination, or how the institution parameter affects results, leaving some 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%, so the description must compensate. It implicitly references 'name' and 'institution' (via 'recent institutions'), but does not explain the 'limit' parameter or provide format/syntax guidance. The description adds limited value beyond 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 searches for deep author profiles via OpenAlex and lists specific return fields (h-index, i10-index, recent institutions). This distinguishes it from siblings like autocomplete_authors_tool (suggestions) and retrieve_author_works_tool (works), though it could be more explicit about the difference from other author search tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_author_by_orcid_tool or get_author_profile_s2_tool. The description does not explain context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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