get_patient_by_id

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It mentions the 'not found' return, which is useful, but it does not describe the exact structure of the patient record or any potential errors. For a simple lookup, the disclosure is adequate but minimal.

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 compact and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by clearly separated Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds information, and there is no filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter lookup tool with no output schema, the description provides enough to select and invoke correctly: purpose, parameter type/examples, and what to expect back (record or not-found). It could be more explicit about the shape of the return record, but the tool's simplicity keeps the gap small.

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?

The schema only specifies an integer type, but the description adds meaning by labeling it 'the numeric ID' and giving examples ('e.g. 1, 42, 200'). This compensates for the 0% schema coverage, though it does not provide additional constraints like value ranges.

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 uses a specific verb 'look up' and resource 'a single patient by their unique patient ID,' clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like list_patients_above_age or find_patients_by_disease. The scope (single record, unique ID) is unambiguous.

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 context of when to use this tool is clear—when you have a numeric patient ID—but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives. The sibling tools imply alternatives, but the description does not explicitly say 'use search_patients_by_name if you don't know the ID.'

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