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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only search by mentioning 'returns', but does not explicitly state safety, auth needs, or rate limits. Adequate for a non-destructive lookup tool.

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?

Two sentences with no redundant information. Front-loaded with the core action and resource, then adds detail about output. 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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains input (condition) and output (recommendations with grades/dosages). Could mention the return format explicitly, but the context is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds value by giving examples of condition values and stating that results are evidence-graded, but does not add new semantic details beyond the schema.

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 'Find' and the resource 'supplements for a health condition or goal', and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_supplements_for_biomarker' by specifying health conditions as input.

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?

Provides examples of conditions ('sleep', 'anxiety', 'joint pain') and states it returns evidence-graded recommendations with dosages, which gives clear context. Lacks explicit exclusion criteria or guidance on when to use alternative tools.

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