get_drug_info

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already discloses the safe read-only nature, and the description aligns with that. However, it adds no behavioral context beyond listing data categories—no input requirements, no rate limits, and no caveats. It does not contradict the annotation, but also does not enrich it.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and scope. Every word earns its place, with no repetition or filler.

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?

While the output schema and readOnlyHint provide some structural context, the description leaves the fields parameter and the required chembl_id identifier unexplained. With only 2 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, this is a meaningful gap in completeness.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter semantics. It does not mention the required chembl_id parameter or the optional fields parameter at all, leaving their meaning and usage completely unexplained.

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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' and identifies the resource as 'a drug,' then lists concrete data categories: 'identity, indication, and mechanism data.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_drug_adverse_events or get_drug_linked_diseases, which target more specific facets.

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 data categories imply when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternatives. It does not distinguish itself from overlapping siblings such as get_drug_linked_diseases or get_drug_literature_occurrences.

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