get_drug_easy_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It states the tool retrieves information (read-only implied) but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, data source scope, or what happens on missing or invalid input. The description is insufficient for a mutation-free query tool.

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?

Two concise sentences (one Korean, one English) that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and content. No wasted words or redundancy. The description is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

With one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential return content (purpose, dosage, side effects, warnings). It does not specify the response format (e.g., JSON structure), error handling, or edge cases, but for a simple lookup tool, the information is largely adequate.

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% with one parameter (drug_name) described as '약품명'. The description adds that the drug name should be in Korean and that the information is patient-friendly, but does not provide additional semantics like expected format, supported languages, or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already covers the parameter.

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 explicitly states it queries patient-friendly Korean drug information and lists specific content categories (purpose, dosage, side effects, warnings). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like check_dur_interaction (drug interactions) and search_drug (general search) by focusing on easy-to-understand patient info.

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 the tool should be used when seeking simplified patient drug information, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_drug or check_dur_interaction. Sibling names provide some context but no direct guidance.

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