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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and open-world profile is covered. The description instead enumerates return contents (short answer, paragraphs, source article, drug, more questions, related articles/medications), which is largely redundant given an output schema exists and adds little behavioral context like auth needs or error behavior.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the action first and no filler. The trailing enumeration of returned fields is somewhat long, but it is compact and readable.

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 read-only single-item detail fetch with an output schema and covering annotations, the definition is sufficient. It omits how a slug is obtained and failure behavior for an invalid slug, which are minor gaps.

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 single parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must carry the semantics. It does clarify that the slug identifies a GoodRx health question, but gives no format or sourcing guidance beyond the word 'slug'.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one GoodRx health question by slug from goodrx_answers'), including the lookup key, so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling list tool goodrx_answers.

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 'by slug' phrasing implies this is a detail lookup against goodrx_answers, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no named alternative. Usage is inferable but not stated.

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