fda_nsde

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful search-pattern behavior like the _missing_/_exists_ sentinels and example queries, but doesn't disclose return structure, pagination, or any endpoint-specific quirks. This is adequate but not rich.

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 compact, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and every line adds actionable information. Examples are formatted clearly with separators and are easy to scan.

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 simple two-parameter read-only search tool with no output schema, this description covers the essential invocation details: query syntax, important field behavior, and examples. It loses one point because it doesn't differentiate from closely related FDA tools in the sibling list, which is a real selection risk.

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 value by giving domain-specific examples for the 'search' parameter (package_ndc, marketing_end_date) and by clarifying the special sentinel syntax, which helps the agent form correct queries beyond the generic schema text.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Search NDC SPL Data Elements' for drug product data. This is clear, but it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like fda_drug_ndc or fda_drug_labels, which could cause confusion when an agent is choosing among FDA drug-data tools.

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?

Provides concrete usage guidance: how to find marketed vs. discontinued products using '_missing_:marketing_end_date' and '_exists_:marketing_end_date', plus example searches. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to choose this tool over sibling FDA drug tools.

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