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

The description adds that it's a GET endpoint ('Medical API: GET /medical/v1/patient'). Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction. The description does not cover other behavioral aspects like pagination, response limits, or authentication requirements beyond what annotations imply.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action ('List Patients') and immediately provides the optional filter and API endpoint. Very efficient.

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's simplicity (1 optional param, read-only, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It explains the filtering capability. However, it does not address potential pagination or how results are returned, which could be useful for a list operation.

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% (facilityId described). The description reiterates the optional filter but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema description (e.g., format, allowed values, or behavior when omitted). Baseline 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's purpose: listing all patients or filtering by facility ID. It specifies the verb 'list', the resource 'Patients', and provides a scope distinction ('all' vs. 'at a given Facility'). This is specific and distinguishes from siblings like 'metriport_get_patient' (single patient) and 'metriport_create_patient'.

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 implies usage: use with optional facilityId to filter, or omit for all. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like 'metriport_get_patient' or when not to use it (e.g., for complex queries needing pagination). No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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