get_patient

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: 'Synthetic sandbox data only,' which informs the user about the non-production environment. The verb 'Get' also implies a read-only operation. It does not detail error behavior or return format, but for a simple get-by-id tool, the core behavior is sufficiently transparent.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and followed by the important environmental note. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary detail 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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description is complete. It states what it returns (demographic details), the input required (FHIR id), and the environment (synthetic sandbox). No additional context is needed for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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%: the parameter patientId is described as 'The FHIR Patient resource id.' The description also mentions 'by their FHIR id,' which reinforces the same meaning but does not add new semantic details beyond the schema. The schema already handles the parameter semantics adequately.

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 'Get demographic details for a single patient by their FHIR id.' The verb 'Get' is specific, the resource is 'patient', and the scope ('single patient', 'demographic details') distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_patients (which implies searching) and get_observations (which targets a different resource).

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: use this tool when you have a specific FHIR id and want demographic details for a single patient. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like search_patients for searching without an id. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative references.

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