get_citation

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States it provides citation text, implying read-only behavior, but does not explicitly disclose non-destructiveness, error conditions (e.g., invalid doc_id), or any limitations. Some behavioral context is present but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences plus an args line, front-loaded with the main explanation. No redundant words, every sentence earns its place. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

For a simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, description covers the key aspects: output types, usage instructions, and parameter source. Missing edge-case behavior (e.g., missing metadata) but overall fairly complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for the doc_id parameter: 'document id from search/list_documents.' This links to sibling tools and clarifies where the ID comes from, going beyond the raw schema.

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?

Description clearly states it provides APA-7 citation (parenthetical, narrative, full reference) for a document, using verb 'get' and specific resource 'citation'. It distinguishes from siblings like list_documents and search by specifying the exact output format and context.

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?

Explicitly tells agent to use output verbatim and that the corpus is APA-only, never mix styles. Provides usage for direct quotes with page numbers. No alternative citation tool exists among siblings, so exclusion is not needed.

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