drchrono_list_lab_resultsList lab results, filterable by doctor, patient, or lab order. Returns a page plus next/previous. DrChrono API: GET /lab_results.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number to fetch (1-based). Default 1. | |
| order | No | Filter by lab order id. | |
| doctor | No | Filter by doctor id. | |
| patient | No | Filter by patient id. | |
| page_size | No | Results per page (max 250). Default 100. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: pagination is present and the response carries 'next'/'previous' cursors, which an agent needs in order to page. It does not cover rate limits or auth, hence not a 5.
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?
Three short sentences, zero filler, purpose stated first, then response shape, then endpoint. Every sentence carries information an agent uses.
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?
No output schema, but the description compensates by naming the return envelope (page plus next/previous). Filters and pagination params are fully covered by the schema. Only missing nuance is default ordering or empty-result behavior, which is minor for a read-only list tool.
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 100%, so each of the five parameters is already documented with id semantics, defaults and max page size. The description only restates the filter set without adding format or syntax detail, matching the baseline for schema-covered params.
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 and resource ('List lab results') plus its filterable dimensions, and names the DrChrono endpoint. An agent can distinguish it from the sibling drchrono_list_lab_orders without opening either 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?
The listing of filter dimensions implies the usage context, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or routing to alternatives such as drchrono_list_lab_orders. Usage is left to inference from the resource scope.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.