spraay_research_biomedical_search

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds cost ($0.002 per call) and argument passing format (typed arguments), neither of which contradict annotations. No further behavioral details are needed, as it is a simple read 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?

The description is extremely concise, consisting of four short statements. It front-loads the main purpose and includes critical details (cost, read-only, argument format) without any fluff.

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 presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values. The tool has only two parameters, and the description covers purpose, cost, read-only, and argument format. It lacks parameter meaning details but is otherwise sufficient for an agent to invoke the 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?

Schema descriptions are tautological ('q parameter', 'max_results parameter'). The overall description does not explain what 'q' or 'max_results' mean (e.g., query format, max results as integer string). Although schema coverage is 100%, the descriptions add no meaning beyond the parameter names.

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 searches 36M+ biomedical papers in PubMed, using a specific verb and resource. Among siblings like spraay_research_biomedical_by_pmid and spraay_research_biomedical_related, this is distinctly the general search tool.

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 mentions read-only and cost, indicating when it is appropriate to use. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the broad search purpose is clear. Alternates are not named, but the context of PubMed-specific search is sufficient.

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