connect_practice

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return values (authorize_url, state) and the need for a follow-up, but omits side effects, user interaction requirements, and state expiration details.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the action, the return value, and the next step.

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?

The description covers the essential flow (initiate and complete), but lacks parameter meanings and any user interaction expectations. For a simple two-param tool, it's adequate but incomplete.

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%, and the description does not explain 'name' or 'fhir_base_url'. The agent is left without any guidance on what values to provide, despite the tool having only two parameters.

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?

Clearly states it begins connecting a practice and returns an authorize_url and state, distinguishing it from the sibling completion tool (complete_oauth). The verb 'begin' is specific, and the resource is a practice.

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?

Explicitly says to use this tool to start the connection and then use complete_oauth to finish, providing clear context and a named next step. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it, but the companion tool reference is sufficient for most cases.

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