Screen Patient Intake → Suggested Pathways

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but description adds behavioral context: the output includes first-line/adjunct medications, workup, and things to avoid. This goes beyond what annotations provide, giving a clear picture of the tool's results and non-destructive nature.

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 sentences with no wasted words. First sentence defines purpose and provides an illustrative example. Second sentence provides usage directive and tier. Front-loaded with key information.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (pathways with medications, workup, avoid list). Both input parameters are covered, and the tool's role in triage is clear. Missing details like pagination or limit but acceptable for a screening tool.

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% and schema descriptions are clear. Description adds an example ('fatigue, low libido, want to lose weight') and notes combination behavior, providing marginal extra value beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: given symptoms/goals, suggests longevity treatment pathways. It distinguishes from sibling tools which focus on specific medication details, FDA status, dosing, etc. The verb 'suggests' and resource 'treatment pathways' are specific and unambiguous.

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 says 'Use to triage an intake' and mentions it is PREMIUM tier, which indicates when to use. Lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the context of siblings (e.g., get_medication_list) implies this is the initial screening step, not a detail lookup.

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