wxoGetPatient360

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It reveals the tool returns patient info, medical data, and recent vital signs, but doesn't disclose read-only status, error handling, or any side effects. The description offers basic behavioral context but lacks depth.

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 that clearly states input and output with no redundant words. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It provides essential context for the tool's purpose and input, though the exact composition of the '360 view' could be clearer. It suffices for a simple one-parameter tool.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, yet the description merely restates the parameter name ('Given a patient id') without adding format, source, or validation details. It adds no meaningful semantic value beyond the property name itself.

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 uses a specific verb 'construct' and identifies the resource as a patient, listing the key data categories (information, medical data, vital signs). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools that focus on single aspects like drug info or vital signs by presenting a holistic 360-degree view.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus sibling tools, though the description implies it is for a comprehensive patient snapshot. It doesn't name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use scenarios, so usage context is implied rather than stated.

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