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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It states it finds 'every' record referencing the lot number, but omits details like output format, pagination, rate limits, or behavior when no records exist. The description is clear but incomplete.

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. Every word is necessary and there is no redundancy. It is highly efficient.

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?

With only one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on output behavior, error handling, or limitations. For a simple lookup, it is adequate but not thorough.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema's parameter description ('The lot number printed on the product/packaging'). No additional context is provided.

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 verb 'Finds', the resource 'every FDA recall record', and the specific criterion 'references a specific product lot number'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_company_history or search_enforcement by focusing on lot number lookups.

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 a lot number is known but gives no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like get_company_history. Without exclusions or context, the agent must infer the scope.

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