spraay_research_biomedical_by_pmid

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds cost ($0.001 per call) and reiterates read-only nature, providing behavioral context beyond annotations. Does not address error behavior or rate limits, but output schema covers returns.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. No redundant information; every sentence serves a purpose (purpose, cost, safety, usage instruction).

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 simple retrieval tool with output schema, the description covers purpose, cost, and safety. Missing explicit error handling details, but contextual completeness is high given low complexity and sibling differentiation.

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% but the schema parameter description ('pmid parameter') is tautological. The tool description clarifies that this is a PubMed ID, adding meaningful semantics beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is raised to 4.

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 explicitly states 'Paper metadata by PubMed ID', clearly identifying the verb (retrieve) and resource (paper metadata), and distinguishes it from siblings like search and related tools that operate on queries or related papers.

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?

Implied usage context: use when you have a PubMed ID and need metadata. However, no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives like spraay_research_biomedical_search, leaving room for ambiguity.

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