Seed Demo Data

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool writes (seeds) data and returns a step_up_token, which is useful context. No contradictions; the behavioral summary is transparent for a population tool.

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, no fluff. The purpose and usage are front-loaded, and every word adds value. Highly concise.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main points: action, when to use, and what is returned (IDs and token). Could specify format or more detail, but sufficient for a simple seeding 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?

Parameter schema has 100% coverage with a description for tenant_id. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, which is adequate. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema already documents the parameter.

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 the action (seed), specific resources (Patient + Observations + Condition bundle), and purpose (live testing, demo session). The description is distinct from sibling tools, which focus on reading, searching, or committing, not seeding demo data.

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 'Use this at the start of a demo session to populate data,' providing clear context. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the demo/testing context is clear and implies production avoidance. No alternatives mentioned, but the tool is unique among siblings.

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