Get ICD-10 Code Details

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive safety. The description adds valuable behavioral context by detailing exactly what comprehensive data is returned (billable flags, medical ontologies like SNOMED/UMLS, hierarchical relationships), helping the agent understand the tool's informational scope beyond generic 'details'.

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, dense sentence efficiently packs six distinct data categories (descriptions, billable status, two synonym types, hierarchy, classification) without filler. Every clause serves to specify the return payload or resource type.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description excellently compensates by enumerating the specific data fields and relationships returned (parent/child hierarchy, chapter classification, external ontologies). For a simple single-parameter lookup tool, this provides sufficient context for the agent to understand both input requirements and output value.

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 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is appropriately met. The description reinforces that the parameter should be a 'specific' code but does not add syntactic guidance, validation rules, or semantic nuances beyond what the schema's examples ('E11.9', 'I10') already provide.

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 uses specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'ICD-10-CM code' and enumerates specific data returned (billable status, SNOMED CT/UMLS synonyms, hierarchy, chapter). It distinguishes from sibling 'get_icd11_code' by explicitly specifying 'ICD-10-CM' and from 'search_codes' by emphasizing 'specific' code retrieval versus search.

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?

While it lacks explicit 'when to use' statements, the phrase 'specific ICD-10-CM code' combined with the single required 'code' parameter clearly signals this is for lookup when the code is already known, implicitly contrasting with the 'search_codes' sibling. The ICD-10-CM specificity clearly differentiates from the ICD-11 variant.

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