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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains the ranking logic (city's own doctors first, then nearest within adaptive radius) and the fallback behavior. No contradictions with 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?

The description is a single paragraph that efficiently communicates the tool's value, output, use case, and fallback. While slightly verbose, every sentence adds necessary information. Structure is front-loaded with the key purpose.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description details the specific elements returned (ranked specialists, price range, rating, free consultation share, page URL). Combined with robust annotations and high schema coverage, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the tool's functionality and make a correct invocation.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters (city, state, procedure). The description links these parameters to the curated guide concept, adding value by explaining how they determine the guide's scope. This goes beyond the schema's basic field descriptions.

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 'NavMDs' curated city guide for a procedure' and enumerates specific outputs (ranked specialists, price range, rating, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like search_doctors by specifying it mirrors editorial city pages.

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 this tool is 'best for' 'who are the best <procedure> doctors in <city>' questions and provides a clear fallback: 'fall back to search_doctors with a nearby larger city'. This gives the agent clear guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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