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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the transparency burden. It states the source (openFDA) and lists output fields, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as result ordering, data freshness, pagination, or rate limits. The 'Get' verb implies a read-only operation, but that is not explicit.

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 concise sentences convey the tool's purpose, output fields, and data source with no filler. The key information is front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema), and the description covers its purpose, output fields, and source. It lacks explicit mention of 'recent' definition or limit behavior, but these are not essential given the schema and overall simplicity. Slightly more detail on expected output format would be useful but is not critical.

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 has 100% coverage for the single optional parameter 'limit', so the description is not required to explain it. However, the description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already defines, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('FDA drug enforcement recalls'), and lists the key fields returned (product, reason, classification, status, company). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tool fda_drug_labels, which deals with drug labels.

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 for retrieving recall data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the related fda_drug_labels or other data tools. There are no exclusions or alternative tool mentions.

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