get_author_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the data source (OpenAlex) and the disambiguation behavior (returns top 3 matches). However, it does not mention error handling, rate limits, authentication, or what happens if no matches are found, leaving gaps in behavioral expectations.

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, each serving a clear purpose: the first states the functionality and outputs, the second specifies the input and a key behavior. There is no wasted text; it is front-loaded and efficient.

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 tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema), the description covers the main aspects: what it returns, how to call it, and a key behavioral trait (disambiguation). It does not detail the output structure or error cases, but these are minor omissions for a low-complexity tool.

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 input schema describes the single parameter with an example. The description adds context by explaining the purpose of the parameter (author's full name) and the effect (returns top 3 matches for disambiguation), enhancing understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 looks up an author's h-index, citation count, paper count, ORCID, and affiliations via OpenAlex. It specifies the input (full name) and output (top 3 matches for disambiguation), distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle abstracts, citations, PDFs, etc.

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 explicitly advises to provide the author's full name and notes that the top 3 matches are returned for disambiguation. It implies usage when an author's identity needs clarification, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to siblings, though the sibling list provides context.

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