last_articles_openalex_materiaux

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns published articles (not preprints), sorted by date, and indicates open access status. It does not mention rate limits or auth, but for a read-only retrieval tool, the core behavioral traits are covered. A score of 4 is appropriate as it adds value beyond the name.

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 concise with three sentences. The first sentence states the main purpose, the second distinguishes from siblings, and the third gives a usage hint. No wasted words.

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 simplicity (one optional param, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, usage, and distinction adequately. It could mention return format but is otherwise complete for agent decision-making.

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 single parameter maxResults is fully described in the input schema (default 30). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, 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?

The description clearly states it retrieves the latest published articles in materials science via OpenAlex, sorted by date, covering all materials. It explicitly distinguishes from ArXiv tools (preprints) and mentions the open access indicator. The verb 'Récupère' and resource are specific.

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 tells when to use (latest published articles in materials science) and when not to use (for preprints, use ArXiv tools; for targeted material search, use search OpenAlex tool). It provides clear alternatives.

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