get_license

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it delivers: it explains exact matching, row-level behavior, validity versus recorded cancellation, and that output is raw official data rather than AI instructions. This goes well beyond a simple lookup description.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by structured caveats. It is longer than a trivial description, but nearly every sentence adds necessary constraints or interpretation guidance.

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 single-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description covers exactness, source, field scope, validity nuance, and permissible uses. It does not explicitly address no-results behavior, but the output schema likely covers the return structure.

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 schema only shows a string named license_no with no description, so the tool description must compensate. It clarifies that the parameter is an exact TFDA permit number, adding meaning beyond the schema, though it does not give format examples or normalization details.

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 verb and resource: fetching all TFDA source rows for one exact permit number with all official fields. It explicitly notes each manufacturer row stays separate, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_matching_license_records.

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 clear usage constraints: decision support only, not for hospital deployment, not for procurement or equivalence, and no patient data. It does not name alternatives explicitly, but the exact-match wording and restrictions give strong context for when to use this tool.

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