search_papers

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

The description merely restates the tool's purpose and adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. It does not mention pagination, sorting, or the nature of results, leaving the agent without insight into the tool's operational behavior.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, achieving high conciseness. However, it is overly sparse and lacks the detail needed to be truly useful, making it merely adequate.

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?

Despite having 10 parameters and an output schema, the description provides no context about the tool's capabilities such as filtering, sorting, or typical usage scenarios. It does not even mention that it returns a list of papers, leaving a significant gap in contextual information.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics, but the schema already thoroughly documents all parameters.

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 Semantic Scholar for papers, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_books and get_paper by explicitly naming 'Semantic Scholar' and '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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_paper, search_books, or recommend_papers. The description lacks any mention of use cases, exclusions, or alternative tool recommendations.

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