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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and an output schema exists that documents the return shape, so the description's enumeration of returned fields adds little behavioral information. It discloses no auth needs, rate limits, or failure modes (e.g. what happens with an unknown slug).

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 verb and lookup key first. The trailing list of returned fields is long and largely redundant given an output schema, which slightly dilutes rather than earns its space.

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 single-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema covering returns, the description gives an agent enough to call it correctly. The missing piece is routing guidance for obtaining a valid slug, which sits just outside the core invocation need.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'slug' parameter, and its own description ('Question slug from /goodrx/answers') already anchors the format. The description adds no syntax, prefix, or lookup guidance beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one GoodRx health question by slug') and names the source collection 'goodrx_answers', which is also a sibling tool. An agent can tell this detail-fetch apart from the collection/list tool without opening either schema.

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?

Usage is only implied: the slug parameter and the reference to goodrx_answers suggest you fetch this after listing from the collection. There is no explicit statement of when to use this instead of goodrx_answers or goodrx_health_article, and no prerequisites are given.

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