where_to_get_help

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully states that the lines are verified and include source-checking details and hours where published, but it does not explicitly describe the operation as static/read-only or clarify freshness guarantees beyond the word 'verified'.

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 front-loaded: it first states the resource and covered lines, then the use cases, then the returned detail. Every sentence contributes without filler.

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?

For a zero-parameter informational tool with an output schema, the description provides enough context about purpose, activation scenarios, and record contents. A minor gap is the absence of explicit sibling routing or exclusions, but the core task is clear.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to explain, and the description does not need to compensate for an input 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 identifies the resource as verified medicine help lines in Portugal and names the specific lines covered. It is readily distinguishable from siblings like find_medicine_near and pharmacies, though it uses a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb such as 'list' or 'return'.

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?

It gives explicit usage contexts: when someone cannot find a medicine, needs urgent advice, or asks who to call. It does not name alternatives or state when not to use this tool versus find_medicine_near, availability, or pharmacies.

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