validate_order

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

The agent contract discloses key behaviors: using structuredContent as source of truth and preserving certain fields. However, without annotations, it fails to mention whether validation is read-only or if any side effects exist.

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 concise with two clear sentences, front-loading the core purpose. The agent contract adds useful behavioral context but could be shortened or separated.

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?

Despite the output schema existing, the description omits what validation checks are performed, error handling, prerequisites, or the overall workflow context. For an 8-parameter tool, this is incomplete.

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 only 25%, and the description adds no meaning for the 6 undocumented parameters (drug_code, dose, dose_unit, route, frequency, patient_crcl). It relies entirely on parameter names, which is insufficient for a 5-required-param tool.

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 'Validate a medication order before submission' with a specific verb (validate) and resource (medication order). It distinguishes from siblings like submit_order and check_drug_interaction by focusing on pre-submission validation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as check_drug_interaction or submit_order. The agent contract is about response handling, not usage context.

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