spraay_research_papers_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds cost ($0.002 per call) and reinforces read-only behavior. This adds some value beyond annotations, but does not disclose further behavioral traits like rate limits or data freshness.

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 covering purpose, cost, and usage hint. Efficient but the third sentence is somewhat redundant with the input schema information. Could be tighter.

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 4 parameters with minimal schema descriptions and no output schema shown, the description does not provide enough context on how to construct queries, interpret results, or handle pagination. The output schema exists but is not leveraged.

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 purely nominal ('q parameter', 'page parameter', etc.) providing no semantic meaning. The description offers no additional context, failing to explain what 'q' represents (search query) or how 'filter' and 'page' work.

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 searches 250M+ academic papers via OpenAlex CC0, distinguishing it from sibling tools like spraay_research_papers_by_author and spraay_research_papers_trending. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from spraay_research_scholarly_search or other similar search tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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 provides minimal guidance: 'Pass the listed fields directly as typed arguments.' No mention of when to use this tool vs alternatives, no prerequisites, no context about query construction or filter syntax.

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