get_renal_adjustment

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

No annotations provided, but the description adds behavioral context via the agent contract: using structuredContent as truth, preserving meta fields, and prohibiting inference. However, it does not disclose read-only nature, authentication, or rate limits.

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: one for purpose and one for agent contract. It is concise, front-loaded, and every sentence adds value without repetition.

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 output schema exists, return values are not needed. However, the description lacks clinical context such as what a renal adjustment recommendation entails, prerequisites, or how results integrate with other tools. The agent contract adds important operational detail but overall completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 description coverage is 50%, missing descriptions for 'drug_code' and 'crcl'. The description mentions CrCl but does not explain units or range. It adds little meaning beyond the schema for 'output_format' and 'locale'. The drug_code parameter is not elaborated.

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 retrieves renal dosing adjustment recommendations based on CrCl. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_drug_dosage' or 'calculate_creatinine_clearance' by focusing on adjustment recommendations. The agent contract further clarifies the tool's specific role.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. The agent contract gives guidance on handling results but no context for selection among siblings. Usage is implied by the tool's name and purpose.

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