Prescription details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those hints by specifying exactly which facets of a prescription are returned and confirming it is the full single-prescription view, not a summary or list.

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 one compact sentence with a clear leading phrase, 'One prescription in full', followed by a well-organized list of the included fields. Every item adds information and there is no filler or repetition.

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 get-by-id tool with one fully documented parameter, read-only annotations, and no output schema, the description is complete: it tells the agent what the call returns and the schema tells it how to supply the ID. No critical invocation detail is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%: prescription_id is documented as 'PrescriptionId from get_prescriptions'. The description text does not add further meaning to the parameter itself, so the baseline 3 applies rather than a higher score.

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 identifies a singular, specific resource ('One prescription in full') and enumerates the exact data included: dispensings, remaining units, validity, issuing doctor/clinic, receiving pharmacy, package size, reimbursement, and substitution. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_prescriptions (plural list) and get_medication_details.

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 singular phrasing and the schema note 'PrescriptionId from get_prescriptions' imply this is the drill-down detail tool after listing prescriptions. However, the description itself never explicitly states when to prefer it over siblings or which alternatives cover list-level or medication-card needs, so usage guidance remains implied rather than stated.

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