list_my_appointments

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

The annotations already convey that the operation is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds value by disclosing the exact return fields (id, status, doctor, slot time), which is especially helpful given there is no output schema. It goes beyond the annotation baseline without contradicting it.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with the action verb first, followed by the target resource and meaningful output details. No filler or redundant phrasing; every clause adds value.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only list tool, the description provides the essential context: ownership by the authenticated patient, the set of siblings it differs from, and the fields returned. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 are zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so the description has no parameter burden to carry. The description appropriately focuses on the resource and result shape, meeting the baseline for a no-parameter tool.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a precise resource ('appointments belonging to the authenticated patient'), and the returned fields. It is clearly distinguished from the sibling tools list_specialties and list_doctors, which target different resources.

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 provides clear context: this tool is scoped to the authenticated patient's appointments, which naturally separates it from the sibling tools listing specialties and doctors. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of a 5.

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