pediatric_dose

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, which align with the arithmetic-only description. The description adds context: it only performs safe, idempotent calculations and optionally caps daily dose. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise: one line as title, one sentence explaining functionality. Every word adds value, no redundancy.

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 output schema exists, return values need not be described. The description covers all critical behavioral aspects (arithmetic-only, capping, user-supplied rate) and is sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds semantic value by explaining the 'mg_per_kg_per_day' parameter must come from a trusted reference and mentioning the optional cap ('max_mg_per_day'). This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 is a 'Weight-based pediatric dose calculator' that computes total daily and per-dose amounts. It distinguishes from siblings like 'body_surface_area' by specifying it only does arithmetic from a user-supplied rate. No ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly instructs the user to supply the dose rate from a trusted reference and clarifies the tool does not recommend doses. This tells when to use (when you have a rate) and when not to (for dose recommendations). Could be improved by naming alternatives.

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