query_pharmacy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states an 'Agent contract' with rules like never infer missing facts, but fails to mention read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects, leaving significant gaps.

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 succinct sentences with no wasted words: the first states function and scope, the second gives behavioral instructions. Every part adds value, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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 tool's complexity (7 params, output schema exists), the description covers core purpose and result handling via the contract. It lacks detail on output structure beyond 'structuredContent', but the existence of an output schema reduces the need, making it mostly complete.

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 low (29%), and the description does not individually explain parameters. However, it adds overall context by listing queried sources, partially compensating. The enums in schema provide some semantics, resulting in an adequate but not strong score.

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?

Description states it is a 'single pharmaceutical knowledge entry point' that queries multiple sources concurrently, clearly defining its comprehensive scope. It differentiates from specific sibling tools like get_drug_info or check_drug_interaction by being a unified query interface.

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 use for broad queries across multiple sources with 'single entry point' and 'concurrently', providing context for when to invoke. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative mentions, earning a 4.

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