fda_approved_drugs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating no mutation. The description adds value by explaining what the tool retrieves (approval history, active ingredients, marketing status) and the source database. No contradiction.

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 concise: one line for purpose, one for searchable fields, one for displayed info, then three example queries. No superfluous text.

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 two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, search capabilities, and result contents. Could specify return format but examples compensate.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters (search and limit) with descriptions. The description adds concrete examples of search queries, enhancing understanding beyond schema. Limit description in schema is sufficient.

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 verb 'search' and resource 'FDA-approved drugs (Drugs@FDA database)'. Examples with brand name, sponsor, application number, and ingredient further clarify the scope. It distinguishes from other FDA tools like fda_drug_events by specifying the Drugs@FDA database focus on approval history.

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 example queries but does not specify when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., fda_drug_labels, fda_drug_events). No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites.

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