nza_zorgbeeld_search

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, which the description does not contradict. The description adds context about returned fields but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination or rate limits.

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 that are front-loaded and concise. No unnecessary words, clearly stating purpose, filters, and return values.

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?

With 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core purpose and returns but lacks guidance for many parameters. It is adequate but incomplete for a complex tool.

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 only 33% (3 of 9 parameters have descriptions). The tool description lists keywords, KVK, and treatment type as filters but does not describe top, limit, offset, dryRun, verbose, or outputFormat. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 searches waiting times for a specific domain (Dutch hospital/medical-specialist care), lists filters (keywords, KVK, treatment type) and returned fields (provider, specialism, waiting time, reference date). It is distinct from sibling tools which cover different data domains.

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 implies usage for querying waiting times with specific filters, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The context of many sibling tools suggests it is domain-specific, providing clear context.

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