Get CPT Codes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the description adds value by noting the 'FREE tier' and specifying input flexibility (name, id, or CPT code) and output fields. This provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of 25 words that efficiently communicates input, output, and tier status. No wasted words.

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 the simple 1-parameter tool with annotations covering read-only nature, the description sufficiently covers input, output fields, and the 'FREE tier' constraint. No output schema exists, but the description enumerates return fields, making it complete.

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 schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter, and the description reinforces acceptable input formats (name, id, or CPT code). It adds meaning by clarifying the parameter's usage beyond the schema's description.

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 returns CPT codes, add-on codes, work RVUs, facility setting, and billing notes for a given procedure. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_procedure_list or get_icd10_codes which serve different purposes.

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 implies usage (look up CPT codes for a procedure) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. Sibling tool names are provided in context, but the description itself lacks explicit guidance on selection.

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