fda-recall-watch

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

Only discloses 'No API key required'; no information on rate limits, pagination, error handling, or whether it is read-only. Lacks behavioral details expected for a tool with no annotations.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose and returns, no unnecessary words. Each sentence serves a distinct function: purpose, returns, relational context, and a technical note (no API key).

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?

Describes core functionality and return fields adequately. Missing minor behavioral context like pagination or total result limits, but sufficient for understanding 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?

Schema covers all 4 parameters with descriptions; the tool description adds no additional semantic details beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states it is a search tool for FDA recalls across multiple categories, specifies return fields, and distinguishes itself by filling a product-safety gap complementary to sibling tools drug-intel and company-due-diligence.

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?

Implicitly suggests use when needing product safety data that complements drug-intel and company-due-diligence, but no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools mentioned.

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