semantic_scholar_bulk_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds behavioral context about sorting and cursor-based pagination, including the return of a continuation token, which goes beyond annotations without contradiction.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and key differentiators. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (10 parameters, output schema), the description covers the main differentiators (sorting and pagination) and references pagination token behavior. It does not mention available filters (year, fields_of_study, etc.), but those are documented in the schema. Slightly more context on pagination limits could be useful, but overall sufficient.

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?

The description does not detail parameters, but the input schema already provides thorough descriptions for each parameter (e.g., sort, token, year). The description adds overarching context about sorting and pagination but does not compensate for the schema's coverage gap (0% description coverage) with additional meaning.

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 verb 'search', the resource 'papers', and key features 'sorting' and 'cursor-based pagination'. It distinguishes from 'regular search' (likely semantic_scholar_search_papers), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 contrasts with 'regular search' by highlighting sorting and pagination support. This tells the agent when to use this tool (for sorted or paginated results) and implicitly when not to (if no sorting/pagination needed, use regular search). However, it does not list specific exclusions or alternatives beyond the contrast.

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