Search Papers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only mentions basic search/filter capabilities, omitting important details such as pagination behavior, sorting, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens when no results are returned. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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, efficient sentence with no redundant wording. It clearly conveys the tool's purpose and general capability, earning its place without unnecessary detail. However, it lacks any extension such as usage context, which would make it more valuable while still being concise.

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?

Despite having a rich schema with 7 parameters, the description fails to provide contextual information about return values, pagination defaults, result structure, or any practical usage scenarios. Since there is no output schema to clarify return data, the description should compensate but does not, making it inadequate for a tool of this complexity.

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?

The schema describes all 7 parameters with clear descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'supports keyword search and filtering conditions' adds only a high-level summary of the parameter set, not enhancing the schema's meaning or providing additional context about parameter usage or relationships.

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 a specific verb+resource: "搜索学术论文" (search academic papers), and distinguishes itself from siblings like search_authors by focusing on papers rather than authors. It also mentions keyword search and filtering, which aligns with the tool's intended function.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_paper for retrieving a specific paper by ID). It simply states the basic functionality without exclusions or alternative recommendations, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the sibling names.

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