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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the Bayesian inference method, the cost ($0.10/call), and the presence of red-flag warnings. It lacks details on error handling or rate limits but covers core behavioral traits.

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 informative but somewhat lengthy, including a URL and pricing detail that could be separate. It is front-loaded with the action but loses conciseness with extra commentary.

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 the tool's medical complexity and lack of output schema or annotations, the description covers key aspects: what it returns, use cases, disclaimer, and cost. Missing details on response format or error states, but adequate for a single-param 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?

The schema already describes the single parameter 'complaint' with 100% coverage. The description adds value by providing a concrete example and noting that any language is accepted, going 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 it starts a Bayesian symptom-to-diagnosis session via Symptia, returning candidate conditions, probabilities, and red flags. The verb 'Start' and the resource 'symptom-to-diagnosis session' are specific, and the tool is well-distinguished from siblings like alya_drug_interactions.

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?

Explicitly states use for triage assistants, telehealth pre-screening, and healthcare chatbots, and warns it is not a substitute for clinical diagnosis. This provides clear context, though it could more explicitly contrast with other medical tools like alya_drug_interactions.

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