icd11_postcoordination

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds meaningful context about what postcoordination entails (severity, laterality, anatomy) and what information the tool provides (axes, required vs optional). No contradictions with 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 concise with a clear opening sentence, bulleted use cases, and a brief definition of postcoordination. No unnecessary words, 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 the complexity of ICD-11 postcoordination, the description covers the key aspects (axes, required vs optional, examples). It is adequate for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and output, especially with an output schema present.

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 parameter 'code', with a basic description. The tool description does not add further semantics about the parameter format, examples, or constraints beyond it being an ICD-11 code. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get postcoordination information for an ICD-11 code' and enumerates specific use cases (find axes, check required vs optional, understand code extension). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like icd11_lookup and icd11_hierarchy.

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 provides explicit guidance with 'Use this tool to:' and bullet points. It gives clear context on when to use, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use or direct to alternative tools for other purposes.

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