explain_doaj_metadataClarify DOAJ metadata terms such as APC, license, ISSN, and diamond OA. Look up any term to decode journal and article metadata.
Explain DOAJ metadata terms such as APC, license, language, ISSN, or diamond OA.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| term | Yes | The metadata term to explain, e.g. "APC", "diamond OA", "license", "ISSN", or "language". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0-beta.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description confirms it is explanatory, but adds no additional behavioral context beyond that.
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?
One succinct sentence, front-loaded with the core action and examples. No unnecessary details.
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?
The tool is simple: it explains a term. The single parameter is well-defined, and no output schema is needed for an explanatory response.
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 schema already fully describes the parameter 'term' with examples. The tool description repeats those examples without adding new semantic information.
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?
Clearly states the tool explains DOAJ metadata terms and gives specific examples (APC, license, etc.), distinguishing it from the sibling search and retrieval tools.
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 purpose strongly implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.