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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and idempotent. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by explicitly stating that contact details, role records, identifiers, and clinical data are never returned, which helps an agent set expectations about the limited response scope.

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 efficient sentences with no filler. The core purpose is stated first, and the negative-scope clarification is added only where it adds value.

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?

For a simple one-parameter, read-only list tool with a full output schema and clear annotations, the description is complete. It explains the scope, the output limitation, and the required context well enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The input schema documents clinicId with a pattern and description at 100% coverage. The description does not add extra parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies exactly what is returned: display names for bookable providers within a single clinic. It also explicitly scopes to 'one tenant-owned DodoDentist clinic', which differentiates it from broader sibling tools like list_clinics.

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 clearly implies usage when you need providers for a specific clinic, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over siblings or mention alternatives like list_clinics for finding clinic IDs. Usage context is present but not spelled out.

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