goodrx_search_drug

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool searches for pricing information, forms, and dosages, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what specific data is returned (e.g., whether it includes pharmacy locations or coupon details). This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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 moderate complexity (search with 3 parameters) and no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavioral traits, usage context, and return values, which are important for a search tool in a domain with multiple sibling tools.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting all three parameters. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, such as examples of drug names or how dosage and quantity affect results. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score 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 the action ('search for a prescription drug') and the resource ('GoodRx'), specifying the purpose to find pricing information, forms, and dosages. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'goodrx_compare_prices' or 'goodrx_get_prices', which might have overlapping functionality, so it doesn't achieve full distinction.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'goodrx_compare_prices' or 'goodrx_get_prices'. It states what the tool does but offers no context on prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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