Cite (Cache Citation / Refresh Source)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that add assigns a biblatex-compatible cite key and returns it with AGLC4 string, and refresh_source uses conditional HEAD with ETag/Last-Modified. However, it does not mention side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits.

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 concise with two sentences that front-load the key information about actions. It is efficient and contains no filler, though a slightly more structured breakdown could improve clarity.

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?

With 16 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It covers the two main actions but does not explain return values for refresh_source, error handling, or prerequisites. It provides adequate context for the core functionality but lacks completeness.

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 88% (high), so baseline is 3. The description adds context for the action parameter and its behaviors but does not elaborate on many other parameters beyond what the schema already provides. The description adds some value but not significantly.

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 it writes to a local citation cache with two distinct actions (add and refresh_source), using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cache_cited_by and fetch_document_text.

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 explicitly tells when to use each action (action=add for storing/updating, action=refresh_source for checking freshness). It does not mention when NOT to use or provide explicit alternatives, but the actions are well-defined.

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