fda_drug_labels

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint: true, so the read-only nature is already known. The description adds value beyond this by showing search syntax, count fields, and the scope of label content, which helps the agent craft effective queries and understand what the search can do.

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 well-organized: a clear one-line purpose, a brief content list, four illustrative example queries, and count fields. Every section adds useful information without redundancy or fluff.

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 search tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains query syntax through examples, lists content covered, and mentions count fields. Minor omission: no mention of pagination or result format, but the limit parameter in the schema covers result size.

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 both parameters (search and limit). The description enhances this by providing concrete search examples (e.g., quoted phrases, _exists_, date ranges) and listing count fields, which give practical meaning beyond the schema's basic field:value description.

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 'Search FDA drug product labeling (package inserts / prescribing information — SPL)' with a specific verb and resource, and lists contents (indications, warnings, boxed warnings). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fda_drug_events (adverse events), fda_drug_recalls, and fda_drug_counts.

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 clear context: this tool is for drug labeling, with example searches demonstrating query patterns and specific uses (e.g., brand name, boxed warning, date range). It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this instead of X', but the content focus and examples make the intended use case unambiguous.

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