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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes this is a safe read, so the description carries less burden. It adds the REST endpoint mapping, but says nothing about what a query status can be, whether results are paginated, or how many queries are returned — the behavior of a polling endpoint is left implicit.

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 short sentences, with the functional purpose front-loaded and the endpoint mapping relegated to second position. Nothing is padded, though the raw URL adds only marginal value beyond the prose.

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, the description should convey what comes back — a status list, its possible states, or at least that it may be empty before a query is started. The name/purpose mismatch ('list' vs 'get the status') also goes unaddressed, leaving a small interpretive gap for a status-polling 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?

There is a single parameter (id) with full schema description coverage ('The Metriport Patient ID'), so the schema already does the work. The description restates the resource hierarchy via the URL path but adds no new semantic detail about the id parameter.

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 — retrieving the status of a patient's consolidated-data (FHIR) queries — and pins it to a concrete endpoint (GET /medical/v1/patient/{id}/consolidated/query). It does not, however, differentiate itself from the close sibling metriport_get_document_query_status or explain how 'list' in the name relates to 'get the status'.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus metriport_start_consolidated_query (start vs poll), nor versus metriport_get_document_query_status. The agent must infer that this is the polling/status counterpart to the start tool from the name alone.

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