enabiz_get_prescription_detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description's behavioral contribution is limited to stating the need for an authenticated session. It does not disclose traits like error handling, invalid IDs, or response format variations. The description adds some value but not rich beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Two sentences: first states the purpose, second provides parameter source and auth requirement. No wasted words, front-loaded with the primary action. Excellent conciseness.

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 presence of an output schema and annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, prerequisite tool, and authentication need. This is sufficient for a simple retrieval tool with two parameters. 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that sys_takip_no and prescription_no are taken from enabiz_list_prescriptions output, adding meaning beyond the parameter names. It does not specify formats or constraints, but the contextual relationship is valuable.

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 drug details of a prescription, specifying the resource (prescription) and the type of details (drug). It also links to the sibling tool enabiz_list_prescriptions for obtaining the required parameters, effectively distinguishing this tool from the list tool.

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 explicitly mentions that the parameters sys_takip_no and prescription_no come from the output of enabiz_list_prescriptions, and requires an authenticated session. This provides clear context for usage, though it does not list exclusions or alternatives beyond the implicit reference to the list tool.

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