enabiz_list_prescriptions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds behavioral details: default year range (last 6 years), doctor query filtering, limit with truncation, and auth error response. This provides useful context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line purpose, clear bullet points for parameters, and a brief note on return values and auth. No redundant or missing information.

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 4 optional parameters and presence of output schema, the description adequately covers default behavior, filtering, pagination (limit/truncated), and error handling. It also links to the related detail tool, making it complete for a list operation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains each parameter: start_year/end_year defaults, doctor_query case-insensitive filtering, limit default (50) and behavior for 0 (unlimited) and truncated flag. This adds significant meaning 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 lists E-Nabız prescriptions by year range, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'enabiz_get_prescription_detail' by noting that drug details require that tool.

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 when to use (listing prescriptions) and mentions an alternative (enabiz_get_prescription_detail for details). It also notes auth requirements. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or other conditions.

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