Search By Author

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that results are paginated; it says nothing about matching behavior (left to the schema), ordering, whether all matching authors are collapsed, or any result caps, which matters for an unannotated search 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?

A single efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. It is appropriately sized for the tool, though 'all papers' mildly conflicts with the default limit of 50.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the schema fully documents all three parameters. For a simple filtered-search tool this is nearly complete, with the only real gap being absence of routing guidance among the many sibling search tools.

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 100%, so limit, offset, and author_name are all fully documented in the schema, including the case-insensitive partial-match semantics. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find all papers by a specific author'), which is clear on its own. It implicitly distinguishes itself from siblings like search_by_year and search_fulltext by naming the author dimension, but never names or contrasts those alternatives explicitly.

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 on when to prefer this over the sibling 'search', 'search_fulltext', or 'search_by_year'. The '(paginated)' parenthetical hints at a large result set but offers no context on when this tool is the right entry point.

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