Check Icd Code

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys that the tool is a read-only validation check, but does not describe error handling, case-sensitivity, codelist version, or side-effect guarantees beyond the implied 'check'. This is minimal but not rich.

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?

A single sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler; every word earns its place. The markdown emphasis on code ties the description to the parameter without extra bulk.

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 simple one-parameter validation tool with an output schema present, the description covers the core operation and parameter meaning sufficiently. It lacks guidance on when to choose list_icd_codes instead and does not mention versioning or edge-case behavior, leaving minor 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?

The schema describes the lone parameter only as a string named 'code' with no further explanation. The description adds meaning by specifying the code is an ISO 6523 ICD code to be checked for recognition, which compensates for the 0% schema coverage, though it omits format or examples.

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 states a clear operation (check) on a specific resource (ISO 6523 ICD code), which separates it from sibling check_*_code tools that target different codelists such as country or currency codes. The inclusion of the ISO 6523 standard removes most ambiguity about what 'ICD' refers to.

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 intended use (validate whether a code exists in the ISO 6523 ICD codelist) is implied but not explicitly stated against alternatives. It does not mention that list_icd_codes should be used when the full set of codes is needed, nor does it state any exclusions.

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