search_cnki

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses pagination/sorting support and cautions about page limits and intervals, hinting at rate limiting or anti-scraping behavior. However, it does not mention error handling, result formats, or other side effects, so transparency is moderate.

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 two sentences: the first defines purpose and capabilities, the second gives precise usage advice. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 search tool with 5 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality, supported search types, sorting/pagination, and practical constraints. It lacks guidance on when to use this versus sibling tools, but otherwise is sufficiently 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?

Schema has 100% coverage of parameter descriptions, so baseline applies. The description reinforces search_type and pagination/sorting but adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 searches CNKI papers with a specific verb and resource. It lists supported search types, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like find_best_match, though the focus on general search is implied.

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?

Provides practical usage guidance: '建议搜索 1-3 页，间隔 2-3 秒' (recommend searching 1-3 pages, interval 2-3 seconds). However, it does not explain when to use this vs. alternatives like get_paper_detail or find_best_match, leaving that decision implicit.

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