semantic_scholar_export_citation

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no new behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, so it meets the baseline for transparency.

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 a single, well-front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core function.

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?

The tool has an output schema that documents return values, so the description does not need to explain them. The description covers the essential purpose and format, but could briefly mention that the output is in BibTeX format, which is already implied. Still, it is minimally 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?

The input schema provides detailed descriptions for each parameter (e.g., paper_id formats, format options). The description only reiterates the BibTeX format, adding minimal extra meaning. Given high schema coverage, baseline score is 3.

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 action (export), the resource (citation for a paper), and the specific format (BibTeX). It distinguishes this tool from siblings that perform searches, author lookups, etc.

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 implies usage when a BibTeX citation is needed for a specific paper, but it does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool, nor does it mention alternatives.

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