get_observations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds useful context: data is synthetic sandbox data, and responses are capped to protect against runaway responses. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only (though 'Get' implies it) or describe the output format.

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 purpose, then key limitations. Every word earns its place; no fluff or repetition.

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 simple tool with 2 params and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and limitations (synthetic data, cap). It could optionally mention ordering or time range, but the examples and constraint 'recent' give a reasonable picture. Overall, sufficiently complete.

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%, and both parameters have clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds context about 'recent' and 'capped,' but does not elaborate on parameter specifics. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents the parameters well.

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 fetches recent clinical observations (vitals, lab results) for a patient by id. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the examples distinguish it from sibling tools like get_patient and summarize_conditions.

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: call this when you need a patient's recent observations. It does not explicitly state when to prefer this over siblings or mention any alternatives/exclusions, but the context of patientId and the tool name make the use case reasonably clear.

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