semantic_scholar_search_papers

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying support for boolean operators and phrase search, which are not disclosed by annotations. However, annotations already declare it read-only and idempotent, so the description's contribution is modest.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences, no redundancy, and front-loaded the key action. Every sentence adds value, achieving high efficiency.

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 description is minimal for a tool with 10 parameters and complex filtering options. While the schema covers parameters and an output schema exists, an agent might miss the availability of filters without reading the full schema. The description could be more complete by hinting at available filters.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaningful context for the 'query' parameter by mentioning boolean operators and phrase search. However, it does not compensate for the lack of coverage on other parameters, which are well-described in the schema but not in the description.

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 'Search for academic papers' using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like semantic_scholar_search_authors or semantic_scholar_snippet_search, which also search but for different resources.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison with similar tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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