export_bibtex

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral details. It only states the outcome (export as BibTeX) but does not mention error handling, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only. The purpose is clear but behavioral context is minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence of 20 words. Every word is necessary. No redundancy.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. It explains the input options but lacks explicit parameter mapping. Overall, it is nearly complete for a relatively simple tool.

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. It mentions 'Semantic Scholar paper ID' and 'arXiv identifier/URL' but does not map these to the parameters 'source' and 'identifier', nor explain what values 'source' can take. It adds some meaning but insufficient detail.

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 states the verb 'Export' and the resource 'a paper as BibTeX', and specifies two input options: Semantic Scholar paper ID or arXiv identifier/URL. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on downloading PDFs or reading papers.

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 when needing BibTeX citations from a paper, and contrasts with sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide direct alternatives.

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