doaj_article_search_by_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add the useful note 'No API key needed,' but it omits other behavioral aspects such as read-only nature, return format, pagination, or rate limits. This is minimal disclosure for an unannotated tool.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and includes a key operational detail (no API key). It contains no fluff or redundancy, achieving excellent conciseness.

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 simple search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks critical details such as return format, pagination behavior, sorting, or any limits. It is too sparse for an agent to reliably understand the full behavior and expected results.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. It only implicitly explains the 'query' parameter via 'by keyword,' but it does not explain 'max_results' beyond what the schema's name and default suggest. This is inadequate compensation for two parameters.

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's function: 'Search DOAJ ... for open-access articles by keyword.' It specifies a specific verb (search), resource (DOAJ), and object (open-access articles), which unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools that target other databases like Scopus, PubMed, or arXiv.

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 for finding open-access articles in DOAJ, but it does not explicitly compare with alternative search tools or state when not to use it. There is no guidance on selecting this tool over others, though the database name itself provides some context.

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