search_medical_info

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the return format, automatic query simplification, and the educational-only limitation. This provides rich context beyond what any schema could, and no contradictions exist.

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 appropriately sized—every sentence contributes meaning, from the search function, to return format, to query tips, fallback behavior, and the disclaimer. The IMPORTANT callout and clear flow make it easy to parse without wasted words.

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 remarkably complete. It tells the agent what kind of queries work best, what happens on empty results, what to expect in the return list, and the educational scope. No further context is needed to invoke it correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by reinforcing query simplicity and explaining the automatic retry behavior, which is not in the schema. It also clarifies the source parameter's role in searching both or one source, though the schema already describes that.

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 it searches peer-reviewed medical information from MedlinePlus and StatPearls, and specifies the return of a list of articles with titles, URLs, and descriptions. It differentiates itself from the sibling 'fetch_medical_article' by emphasizing search rather than retrieval of a specific article.

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 explicit usage guidance on query formulation, advising simple 1-3 term queries and giving a concrete example of simplification. It also notes the automatic fallback to simpler queries, which helps agents understand behavior. It does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state exclusions, but the context is clear enough.

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