Consultar Código CID-10

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds valuable behavioral details: acceptance of both dotted and undotted code forms, return of canonical display, and conditional gender/cause-of-death restriction flags. This goes beyond the annotation baseline.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, three bulleted use cases, and a final note on input normalization. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool with one fully documented parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, input format, output behavior, and edge cases (dotted/undotted). No significant 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'code' parameter well. The description adds meaning by clarifying the accepted input variants and the canonical output behavior, which is not in 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Look up a specific CID-10 code and return its Portuguese name.' It uniquely identifies exact-code lookup, distinguishing it from siblings like cid10_search (term search) and icd11_lookup (ICD-11).

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 'Use this tool to' bullets provide clear context for when to use this tool: resolving codes, confirming existence, and retrieving restriction flags. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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