MCP Cliniko Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Create a new patient' implies a write operation, but it doesn't specify permissions needed, whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on duplicate data, or the response format. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient sentence ('Create a new patient') with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, though it could benefit from more detail given the tool's complexity.

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 complexity (16 parameters, mutation operation) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or behavioral aspects like data validation, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with each parameter clearly documented (e.g., 'first_name' as 'Patient first name', 'date_of_birth' with format 'YYYY-MM-DD'). The description adds no additional parameter information beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Create a new patient' clearly states the verb ('Create') and resource ('patient'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_patient' or 'delete_patient' beyond the basic action, nor does it specify what constitutes a 'patient' in this context (e.g., medical record vs. contact).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_patient' or 'get_patient', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., required fields, authentication needs) or context for creation. It's a bare statement without usage context.

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