health.hospital-quality

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It indicates the tool returns ratings and measure summaries, implying a read-only query. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or potential side effects. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise, two sentences front-loaded with the core purpose. It efficiently conveys scope and filter options. Minor improvement could be structuring the measures list more explicitly.

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 6 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description provides enough to start using the tool but lacks details on response format, pagination behavior, and parameter interactions. It mentions result content (star rating, measure summaries) but not structure.

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 33% (2/6 parameters have descriptions). The description adds meaning for facilityId, state, city, name by grouping them as filters, and clarifies facilityId as CMS number and name as partial match. But limit and offset are left unexplained, which is a gap.

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 provides CMS Care Compare hospital quality ratings for ~5,300 Medicare-certified US hospitals, listing specific measures. It distinguishes from siblings like health.hospital-lookup by focusing on quality ratings rather than basic info, but could be more explicit about differentiation.

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?

It specifies querying by facilityId or state/city/name filters, giving a clear entry point. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus other health tools (e.g., health.hospital-lookup) and does not mention prerequisites or limitations.

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