find_drugs_for_condition

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral context by stating that results are sorted by frequency ('most frequently indicated'), which is not captured by annotations. No contradiction detected.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains zero filler or redundancy. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple nature of the tool and the presence of annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint) and a complete schema, the description is complete. An output schema exists but its content is not needed for basic usage.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters ('condition' and 'max_results'). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema, so a 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 tool's purpose: 'Find drugs whose FDA labels list a given condition as an indication.' It specifies the verb 'find', resource 'drugs', and mentions a unique aspect ('generic drugs most frequently indicated'), which distinguishes it from siblings like 'find_drugs_by_active_ingredient'.

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 implies usage for condition-based drug lookup but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. The context is clear, but no direct guidance on selection among sibling tools.

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