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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds contextual meaning (FDA official signal, medtech selling) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination behavior or rate limits. It neither contradicts annotations nor enriches them significantly, resulting in a baseline 3.

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 two sentences, with the first sentence front-loading the core action and resource, and the second adding valuable context. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or 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 9-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides a solid overview of the tool's purpose and real-world relevance. It doesn't explain return format, but the search nature implies a list result, and the parameter schema covers the details. While more explicit sibling differentiation would help, the description is adequate for most use cases.

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%, so each parameter's purpose is already documented. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, only general context about categories and discontinuances. This meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 searches FDA's current medical device shortage list and discontinuance list, using a specific verb ('Search') and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying 'medical device' rather than drugs, and mentions 'shortage categories and permanent discontinuances'.

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 provides clear usage context by noting this is an official FDA supply-chain signal for medtech selling, covering shortages and discontinuances that may affect customer operations. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, such as pointing to fda_drug_shortages for drug-related queries.

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