find_open_access_link

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose two real behaviors: it returns a landing-page link rather than content, and OA status is not a license grant. Missing are what happens when no OA link exists (null, error, empty), and any auth or rate-limit notes.

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?

Very short and front-loaded: the scope constraint comes first, the licensing caveat second. The license sentence is slightly tangential to tool invocation but is legitimately part of this tool's contract, so it earns its place.

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 one-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description should explain return shape and the no-result case; it says a link is returned but not in what form or what happens on failure. The licensing caveat partially offsets this, but the description is not complete enough to call the tool blind.

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 0% and the single doi parameter has no schema description, so the description must compensate. It mentions OpenAlex but never states the DOI format (bare DOI vs. URL vs. prefixed) or whether the DOI must be registered, leaving the only parameter underspecified.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Find an OpenAlex OA landing-page link") and immediately bounds the scope with "only; never retrieve the paper itself." This implicitly separates it from retrieval tools like get_paper_by_doi or search_papers, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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 negative guidance ("never retrieve the paper itself") and the license warning imply when the tool applies, but there is no explicit routing instruction versus get_paper_by_doi, get_ssrn_reference_link, or source_and_rights_policy. The agent must infer that this is the DOI-to-OA-link step in a larger workflow.

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