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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only profile, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: a 100-record return cap, truncation guidance ('narrow the dates if truncated'), and the disclosure that room links are omitted. These are exactly the traits an agent cannot read off the annotations.

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?

Front-loaded and terse; the invocation constraint, result cap, and omitted field are all packed into short clauses with no filler. The opening sentence is a fragment rather than a full sentence, but it still reads cleanly and every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and zero required parameters, the description carries the return-behavior burden and does so (100 cap, truncation, omitted room links). Nothing an agent needs to invoke a filtered list correctly appears to be missing.

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 60%, so the schema documents start_range/end_range/practitioner but leaves patient_id and status thin. The description compensates by explaining the OR relationship between patient_id and the date-range pair and the 31-day cap constraint, which the schema does not encode.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Appointments') and enumerates the filter dimensions (patient, date range, practitioner, status), which immediately separates it from the singular sibling akutehealth_get_appointment. An agent can tell what it retrieves without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete invocation rules: 'Give a patient_id, or both start_range and end_range (at most 31 days apart).' This is clear context for how to call it, but it never names an alternative or states when a different tool (e.g. get_appointment) should be preferred.

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