MCP Cliniko Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'list or search' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination behavior (implied by parameters but not stated), rate limits, authentication requirements, whether it returns active/inactive patients, or what happens when no parameters are provided. The description is minimal and leaves key behaviors unspecified.

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?

Extremely concise at just 4 words - 'List or search for patients'. It's front-loaded with the core functionality. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness, making it somewhat under-specified rather than optimally efficient.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a list/search tool with pagination parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (patient objects? just IDs?), how pagination works, search capabilities beyond the 'q' parameter, or how it differs from related tools. For a tool with 3 parameters in a medical context, this is inadequate.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters with good descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema - it mentions 'search' which aligns with the 'q' parameter but provides no extra context about search syntax, ranking, or default behaviors.

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 'List or search for patients' clearly states the verb ('list/search') and resource ('patients'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'get_patient' or 'list_appointments'. It doesn't specify whether this returns all patients or has implicit filtering.

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 like 'get_patient' (for single patient) or 'list_appointments' (for appointments). The description implies it can both list and search, but doesn't clarify when to use search versus list functionality or how it relates to sibling tools.

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