fhir_resolve_codeable_concept

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

Discloses selection priority (OHDSI vocabulary preference, user_selected override) and fallback to semantic search. Also mentions on_unmapped behavior. Lacks details on side effects, auth, or rate limits, but no annotations exist to fill gap.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence 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?

No output schema. Description fails to explain return values (e.g., resolved concept, concept_id, or structure). Leaves agent guessing what the tool returns.

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 coverage is 67% (4 of 6 parameters described). Description adds context on overall behavior but doesn't detail specific parameters like include_recommendations or include_quality. Does not significantly enhance schema meaning.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Resolve a FHIR CodeableConcept with multiple codings.' Distinguishes from siblings like fhir_resolve by specifying OHDSI vocabulary preference and fallback semantic search.

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?

Implies use for FHIR CodeableConcept with multiple codings and fallback, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not compared to siblings like fhir_resolve or map_concept.

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