Doktor MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic functionality without disclosing behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what happens when no results are found. It mentions filtering but doesn't explain how filters combine.

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-load the core purpose and optional filters with zero wasted words. Every sentence earns its place by delivering essential information efficiently.

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?

For a search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic purpose and filters but lacks completeness regarding behavioral aspects (e.g., result format, pagination, error cases) that would help an agent use it correctly.

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 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by mentioning specialty and city filters, but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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 specific action ('Search for doctors'), target resource ('on doktor.mx'), and key constraint ('who accept a specific health insurance plan'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'buscar_doctor' (general search) and 'buscar_por_padecimiento' (search by condition).

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 clear context for when to use this tool (searching doctors by insurance plan with optional filters), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among sibling tools like 'buscar_doctor' or 'buscar_por_padecimiento'.

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