get_soap_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It only states what the tool returns, but omits any details on read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or effects of invoking the tool (e.g., no side effects mentioned). This is insufficient for an agent to understand safe usage.

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 of 10 words, which is concise. However, it is too brief given the complexity of the tool (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), sacrificing crucial information for brevity.

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 has 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return value structure, pagination, error handling, or required fields like clinic_id. An agent would need additional context to use the tool accurately.

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?

The description mentions 'patient/problem' and 'date range', which map to patient_id, problem_id, start_date, and end_date parameters, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, clinic_id is not mentioned, and the schema coverage is 0%, so the description only partially compensates for missing parameter descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns SOAP notes for a patient/problem within a date range. The verb 'Return' and resource 'SOAP notes' are specific, and the context distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_clinical_notes or write_soap_draft.

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 for retrieving SOAP history by patient/problem and date range, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it reference sibling tools or alternatives. Context is implied but not explicit.

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