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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses the index scale, data source (openFDA, daily updates), the meaning of the index (drugs vs 250-crisis ceiling), and the Gold tier requirement for history requests. It also lists what fields the response contains, providing substantial behavioral context.

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 compact and front-loaded: it starts with the core output and components, follows with explicit usage cues, and ends with a one-word update cadence. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

For a read-only index tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the return fields and the history behavior, which is sufficient for basic use. It could be more complete by detailing the 'by_category' structure or the format of trend, but overall it is well-rounded.

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 100% for the single 'days' parameter, including its optional nature, range, and the Gold tier fallback behavior. The main description repeats this Gold tier info but adds no additional parameter semantics 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 tool returns a 0-100 US drug supply-disruption pressure index, with specifics on the data source (FDA shortage list vs crisis ceiling), and enumerates the included components (trend, current_shortages, by_category, etc.). This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from other adw tools by domain and calculation.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call when the user asks about drug shortages, pharmaceutical supply pressure, or hardest-hit therapeutic categories, or when timing pharmacy inventory, pre-buy, or alternate-supplier decisions.' However, it does not mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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