fda_drug_ndc

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by detailing the data content (132K+ records, product data, active ingredients) and count fields, which is beyond what annotations provide. It does not contradict annotations.

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-structured with examples and a count fields list, but it is somewhat lengthy. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and usage without unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's complexity (132K+ records, various search fields) and no output schema, the description comprehensively explains what the tool returns (product data, ingredients, packaging, etc.) and provides practical search examples. It covers all necessary context for an agent to use it effectively.

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% (both parameters described in schema). The description adds example search values but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Search the NDC Directory — National Drug Code product listings' and provides concrete examples of search fields like brand_name, dea_schedule, etc. This distinguishes it from sibling FDA tools like fda_drug_events or fda_drug_labels.

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 the description implies usage for querying NDC data via examples, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus its many FDA siblings, nor when not to use it. The guidance is implicit but lacks explicit situational context.

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