search_clinical_notes

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions 'full-text search' but does not describe return format, pagination, ordering, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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 very concise (one sentence), but at the cost of completeness. It is front-loaded, but lacks critical details that would help an agent use the tool correctly.

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 3 parameters with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'flat SOAP collection' means, search algorithm, or result structure, leaving agents underinformed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds no meaning beyond parameter names; for example, it does not explain that 'query' is the search term, 'clinic_id' filters by clinic, or 'limit' controls result count.

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 performs full-text search over the flat SOAP collection. It identifies the resource and action, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_soap_history or query_problem_list, though the function is distinct.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not indicate whether to use this for free-text search vs get_soap_history for structured data or query_problem_list for problem-specific queries.

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