multilingual_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses keyless access, ISO 639-1 language codes, default languages, translation behavior with/without key, and that results are real but fewer without key. It lacks details on rate limits or pagination but is otherwise transparent.

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 concise, with front-loaded main action and no wasted sentences. It uses parenthetical clarifications effectively. Could be more structured (e.g., bullet points) but remains clean and readable.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (return values covered), the description covers core purpose, parameter details for two of three params, usage guidelines, and behavioral nuances. It feels fairly complete for a search tool, though 'per_lang' is a gap.

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%. The description explains 'languages' as ISO 639-1 codes with defaults, and 'query' implication for translation. However, 'per_lang' (integer, default 3) is not explained; its meaning (presumably results per language) is left ambiguous, requiring the agent to infer or guess.

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 the global scholarly literature across languages via OpenAlex (keyless).' It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('scholarly literature'), and differentiates from sibling tools like web_search by focusing on multilingual and non-English works.

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 explicitly says when to use: 'Use to surface non-English work... that an English-only search misses.' It also explains behavior differences with/without an LLM key. While it doesn't list when not to use or explicit alternatives, the context is clear.

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