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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds specific behavioral details about what data is returned (coordinates, sector, available slots for 7 days), which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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, with the first sentence listing many items. It is front-loaded with the main verb 'Retourne' and the usage instruction. While comprehensive, it could be slightly more concise, but there is no wasted text.

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 has only one parameter, no output schema, and annotations present, the description adequately covers what the tool returns and when to use it. It mentions available slots for the next 7 days, which is useful context. Missing details about output format are acceptable since no output schema exists.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter `doctor_id`, which is already described in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema provides. Therefore, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns the complete profile of a doctor, listing specific data elements, and explicitly says it should be called after search_doctors to help patients choose. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_doctors or appointment-related tools.

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 clear context: 'À appeler après search_doctors pour aider le patient à choisir son médecin.' This tells when to use it. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the sibling tools are primarily appointment actions, making the usage distinction clear.

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