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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the underlying endpoint (GET /symptoms/{id}), which is mild context, but says nothing about error behavior for unknown ids, rate limits, or whether the optional age/model_id headers alter the response — a meaningful gap for a lookup tool with conditional context parameters.

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 short sentences with the operation front-loaded and the endpoint mapping as supporting detail. No filler, nothing redundant.

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 schema is fully documented and annotations carry the read-only safety profile, so an agent can invoke the tool correctly. However, with four parameters including a nested age object and no output schema, the description never explains what a symptom record contains or how the optional age/model_id context affects results, leaving usage guidance thin.

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 all four parameters (id, age, dev_mode, model_id) are already documented in the schema, including the header mappings. The description contributes nothing beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource with scope narrowed to a single item ('Get a single symptom by its id'), which contrasts implicitly with the sibling infermedica_list_symptoms. It stops short of explicitly differentiating itself from siblings or naming the identifier scheme beyond the schema's 's_21' example.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this rather than infermedica_list_symptoms or infermedica_search_concepts, nor any mention of prerequisites such as needing a valid symptom id. The only context is the implicit 'by its id' phrasing.

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