kci_collect

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the tool writes files (out_dir), requires an authentication key for REST mode, uses date formats (YYYY-MM-DD for OAI, integer years for REST), and defaults to home kci-output/. This adds useful context without contradicting the 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 compact and bulleted, conveying the main routing logic in a few lines. Every sentence adds value, though the opening '[혼용]' is a bit cryptic. Overall it is 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?

Given the high parameter count (12) and lack of output schema, the description explains the core decision logic and default behavior but does not describe return values, the effect of max_records, or the formats parameter. This leaves some gaps for a complex tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains terms/title, contains, year_from/year_to, date_from/date_until, set_spec (implicitly), and out_dir. However it omits semantics for name, formats, and max_records, leaving those parameters underdocumented.

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 function: it collects records and saves them to a file, with automatic selection between REST and OAI protocols based on query presence and authentication key. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kci_search (searching without file saving), though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 internal routing rules (when to use REST vs OAI) but no guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings such as kci_harvest or kci_search. There are no explicit 'when not to use' statements or alternative tool references.

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