arxiv_search

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

No annotations are present, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions a free tier and cost but omits details on error handling, rate limits beyond the daily count, pagination behavior, or any side effects. The minimal information leaves the agent uninformed about operational constraints.

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 short but mixes purpose, pricing, and API URL in a single line. It is front-loaded with the purpose but could be more structured by separating functional info from operational details.

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 tool lacks an output schema, so the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of academic papers). It does not specify the output format, limit the domain to arxiv, or clarify that results are from academic repositories. Given the many sibling search tools, this omission is significant.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (query and maxResults). The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 includes '[Search] 论文检索' which clearly indicates a paper search tool, distinguishing it from general web search or news search siblings. However, it does not explicitly mention 'arxiv' in the description text, only in the API URL, which slightly reduces clarity.

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 like web_search, wikipedia, or news_global. The description only contains pricing and API endpoint without contextual usage hints.

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