clinical_trials_results

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true; description adds value by detailing the return structure (outcome measures, adverse events, etc.) and precondition for using the tool. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences front-load purpose and contents, with third sentence covering precondition and sibling tool use. No 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?

Given one parameter, no output schema, and thorough annotations, the description fully covers purpose, contents, and usage constraints, making it complete for a data retrieval tool.

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 the single parameter nct_id, with schema description providing format example. Description mentions 'NCT ID' in context but doesn't add significant meaning beyond schema, meeting baseline.

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 explicitly states it gets posted results for a completed clinical trial by NCT ID, listing specific data types returned (outcome measures, adverse events, participant flow, baseline characteristics). It distinguishes from siblings by referencing preconditions and another 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?

Explicitly states 'Only works for trials where hasResults=true' and directs to use clinical_trials_search with agg_filters='results:with' to find suitable trials, providing clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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