zotero_run_saved_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does it well: it states the operation returns top-level items and highlights a critical behavioral constraint (local API only). It does not explicitly confirm the call is read-only or that the saved search definition is unchanged, but 'execute ... and return' strongly implies a non-mutating operation.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The main action and result are front-loaded, and the important local-only constraint is placed in a compact second sentence that earns its place.

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?

For a two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description plus schema covers the essentials: what runs, what is returned, the limit parameter, and the critical local-only restriction. It could add a pointer to how to obtain a search_key or mention that results exclude child items, but those are minor gaps given the output schema.

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%: search_key and limit both have descriptions. The tool description adds nothing about the format of search_key or how limit interacts with pagination beyond the schema's default of 50, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description opens with a specific action 'Execute a saved search' and names the exact resource and result type ('matching top-level items'). The 'LOCAL-API-ONLY' caveat further disambiguates it from Web-API-based sibling tools, even without naming them.

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 'LOCAL-API-ONLY capability' line gives clear context that this tool is the only way to actually run saved searches and that Web API access cannot do so. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like zotero_search_items or state when not to use them, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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