Get paper full text

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses truncation behavior, failure mode, and that no file is saved. This is sufficient for a tool that downloads and extracts text.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with action, no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite no output schema, description explains that full text is returned directly, covers truncation, failure, and input formats. Complete for a simple extract 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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning: 'Accepts a record id or URL' clarifies id, and 'Long papers are truncated to max_chars' adds context for max_chars beyond 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 downloads and extracts full text from a PhilArchive open-access PDF, returns directly, accepts id or URL, truncates, and fails clearly. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fetch_pdf or get_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?

Description explains when to use (get full text from open-access PDF) and failure condition (no open-access PDF). It implies context but doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but siblings are diverse.

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