Batch medical code lookup (up to 25 codes)

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavioral details: pricing is per code at $0.001 × code count, the maximum is 25, and the full charge is refunded when every code misses. It also summarizes the per-item return fields, including DMEPOS fee schedule behavior when a state is supplied.

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 two tightly written sentences. It is front-loaded with the core lookup purpose, then adds return behavior, pricing, maximum, and refund condition without redundant restatement.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately enumerates what each item returns and explains the cost model and batch limit. It does not describe error behavior for invalid codes or partial misses beyond the all-codes-miss refund, but it is otherwise complete for correct invocation.

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 the input schema already documents all three parameters, including the codes list, state filter, and codeType enum. The description adds only limited extra parameter meaning, such as reinforcing that state affects DMEPOS fee schedule output, so it meets the baseline rather than exceeding it.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: look up a list of medical codes across ICD-10, CPT, and HCPCS. The phrase "in one call" clearly distinguishes this batch operation from single-code lookup siblings, and the supported code systems are stated explicitly.

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 makes the batch use case clear by saying it looks up a list of codes in one call and enforces a 25-code maximum. It does not explicitly name single-code alternatives or state when validation rather than lookup is appropriate, so it lacks full routing guidance despite clear context.

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