semantic_scholar_search_papers

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds that it returns Markdown by default (with JSON option), discloses pagination behavior and max 100 per call, and mentions the scope (200M+ papers). No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Single paragraph of about 4 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then features, usage guidance, alternatives, and output options. Every sentence adds value; no redundant or extraneous wording.

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 presence of an output schema, the description covers search behavior, filters, pagination, alternatives, and output format (Markdown/JSON). It provides enough context for the agent to understand the tool's capabilities and limitations without needing further details.

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% per signal, but description compensates by summarizing filter categories (year, field-of-study, publication-type, open-access, citation-count) and pagination (offset/limit, max 100). This adds high-level context beyond schema descriptions, though individual parameter details are left to the 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?

Clearly states 'Search for academic papers' with specifics: relevance-ranked keyword search over 200M+ papers, boolean operators, filters for year, field-of-study, etc. Differentiates from siblings by naming semantic_scholar_bulk_search, semantic_scholar_snippet_search, and semantic_scholar_match_paper, each with distinct use cases.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to use this tool vs alternatives: bulk_search for sorted/large sets, snippet_search for full text, match_paper for one known title. Also provides pagination details (offset/limit, max 100 per call) and supported filter categories, enabling correct invocation.

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