mah_list_upcoming_visits

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds the temporal scoping ('upcoming and in-progress'), which is genuinely useful behavior context, but says nothing about result volume, ordering, or which patient's visits are returned.

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?

A single eight-word sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. Every word earns its place and the scope constraint is stated up front.

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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does not indicate the response shape or whether the tool returns visits for the active patient only. For a simple two-optional-parameter read tool this is adequate but leaves a real ambiguity given siblings like mah_set_active_patient.

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 'view' enum and 'timeZone' default are documented in the schema in more detail than the description could add. The description contributes no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb (List) and a scoped resource (upcoming and in-progress MyAtriumHealth appointments), which naturally excludes past visits and distinguishes it from the sibling mah_list_past_visits. However, it never names that sibling, so the differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to the alternative (mah_list_past_visits) or the related tools that establish which patient is active. The scope phrase 'upcoming and in-progress' hints at the use case but nothing is spelled out.

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