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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description adds valuable behavioral context: answers are 'in the same language as the question,' the tool is 'Country-aware,' and the question is 'processed once and not stored.' These details meaningfully shape an agent's expectations without contradicting the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. Each sentence contributes: scope, country-awareness, and privacy/read-only behavior.

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 single-parameter open-ended Q&A tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it defines accepted input, answer characteristics (structured, same-language, country-aware), and privacy behavior. Nothing essential to invoking it correctly is missing.

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% and the question parameter already has a clear description. The tool description adds value by giving example question types (symptoms, medicines, dosing, interactions, lab results, home remedies) and explaining the same-language behavior, which helps the agent construct an appropriate question.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Ask GoDavaii's Advanced Health AI any health question' and lists concrete categories (symptoms, medicines, dosing, interactions, lab results, home remedies). It is clear, but it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tools check_drug_interaction and medicine_info, so it misses the full sibling-differentiation bar.

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 phrase 'any health question' implies this is the general-purpose tool, and the enumerated categories signal breadth. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer a sibling (e.g., check_drug_interaction) instead, nor any exclusions, leaving routing to inference.

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