get_top_venues_for_field

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

No annotations provided, but the description implies a read-only operation by stating it 'gets' venues and ranks them. It does not mention side effects, permissions, or limitations, but for a straightforward read tool, it offers sufficient insight into its behavior.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second and third provide usage guidance. Information is front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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 simple nature of the tool, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, workflow, and usage context. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with good descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, achieving the baseline score.

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 retrieves top journals and conferences for a research field ranked by h-index, using specific verbs and naming the resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_works_in_venue by positioning itself as a prerequisite step.

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?

Explicitly describes when to use the tool ('Essential first step before searching for citations') and directs users to the next tool ('use search_works_in_venue to restrict searches to them'), providing clear context and alternative.

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