Find similar DOAJ articles

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

The description mentions the use of 'local lexical and metadata similarity,' giving some insight into the matching method. However, it does not describe any side effects or return behavior beyond the read-only nature already indicated by annotations.

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, concise sentence that avoids redundancy. It is appropriately brief for its purpose.

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 simplicity of the tool (three parameters, no output schema), the description provides the core idea but omits details about the returned data format or how similarity is scored. This is a minor gap but not critical for basic usage.

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 provides detailed descriptions for all three parameters, covering limit, title, and abstract. The description adds no additional semantic information beyond what the schema states.

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's purpose: finding similar articles. It is distinct from search because it focuses on similarity, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like search_doaj_articles.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_doaj_articles or get_doaj_article_by_doi. It does not mention any conditions or use cases.

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