query_instances

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool performs a DICOM C-FIND network operation and returns success false on failure. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but the operation type implies no side effects. The return format is explained.

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 well-structured with a purpose statement, detailed paragraphs, and clearly labeled Args, Returns, and Notes sections. It is front-loaded with the main action. Minor redundancy exists (purpose repeated in first sentence of second paragraph) but does not detract significantly.

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 has 6 parameters (1 required) and an output schema, the description covers all parameters with explanations and provides a concrete return example. It also includes a note about failure handling. No annotations exist, so the description effectively fills the gap.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It provides detailed explanations for all six parameters, including the purpose of series_instance_uid, instance_number, sop_instance_uid, attribute_preset (with enumerated options 'none' and 'custom'), additional_attributes, and exclude_attributes. This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool queries individual DICOM instances (images) within a series using a C-FIND operation at the IMAGE level. This specific verb and resource level distinguishes it from sibling tools like query_patients and query_series, which operate at different DICOM levels.

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 explains when to use the tool (to find instances within a series) and provides required and optional filters. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings, leaving room for ambiguity.

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